On 3/20/24 20:57, arn...@skeeve.com wrote:
Note that I said EREs, which don't have to provide backreferences.
Ah, sorry, I missed that. Thanks for correcting me. In that case there
should be a polynomial-time solution.
Note that I said EREs, which don't have to provide backreferences.
Arnold
Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 3/20/24 01:40, arn...@skeeve.com wrote:
> > It's possible to write a POSIX compliant matcher for EREs that doesn't
> > have such problems; I know someone doing it.
>
> I think matching POSIX regula
On 3/20/24 01:40, arn...@skeeve.com wrote:
It's possible to write a POSIX compliant matcher for EREs that doesn't
have such problems; I know someone doing it.
I think matching POSIX regular expressions in polynomial time is
equivalent to proving P=NP, i.e., you'll win the Turing Award if you
Hi.
Paul Eggert wrote:
> In glibc (and Gnulib) the regular-expression code has long been
> maintained under the philosophy that the code cannot handle arbitrary
> regular expressions. Any code that lets the user specify an arbitrary
> regular expression is suspect, and this includes Awk scripts
Paul Eggert wrote:
> In glibc (and Gnulib) the regular-expression code has long been
> maintained under the philosophy that the code cannot handle arbitrary
> regular expressions. Any code that lets the user specify an arbitrary
> regular expression is suspect, and this includes Awk scripts. (Th
In glibc (and Gnulib) the regular-expression code has long been
maintained under the philosophy that the code cannot handle arbitrary
regular expressions. Any code that lets the user specify an arbitrary
regular expression is suspect, and this includes Awk scripts. (This is
also true for C libr
Hello.
Please see this report sent to the gawk list concerning regcomp.c.
I have attached his "POCFILE".
Thanks,
Arnold
> From: ttfish
> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 21:48:34 +0800
> Subject: Segmentation Fault via recursive loop in Gawk
> To: bug-g...@gnu.org
> Cc: secur...@gnu.org
>
> Content-Type
