https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2014-06-25 00:00:00 |2021-12-16
Assignee|timshen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to M Welinder from comment #22)
> FWIW, there is an excellent overview of regular expression engine pitfalls
> and methods here:
>
> https://swtch.com/~rsc/regexp/regexp1.html
> https://swtch.co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
M Welinder changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||terra at gnome dot org
--- Comment #22 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #21 from Tim Shen ---
(In reply to Pádraig Brady from comment #20)
> Any status update on this. GCC7 is looming...
> Thanks.
Unfortunately I haven't get a chance to work on this. I plan to put up a
one-line tweak on the internal stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Pádraig Brady changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||P at draigBrady dot com
--- Comment #20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Tim Shen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||chaoskeeper at mail dot ru
--- Comment #19 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Tim Shen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bisqwit at iki dot fi
--- Comment #18 from Ti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Tim Shen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kerukuro at gmail dot com
--- Comment #17 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Tim Shen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||antialize at gmail dot com
--- Comment #16 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Tim Shen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||morandidodo at gmail dot com
--- Comment #15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #14 from Tim Shen ---
(In reply to Maksymilian Arciemowicz from comment #13)
> @Tim: do you need help?
This is what I'm going to do:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2014-07/msg8.html
Please send to libstdc++ ml if you have any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #13 from Maksymilian Arciemowicz ---
@Tim: do you need help?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #12 from Maksymilian Arciemowicz ---
Ups. Check this (.*{100}{300})
gcc version 4.10.0 20140701 (experimental) (GCC)
Starting program: /home/cx/REtrunk/kozak5/t3 '(.*{100}{300})'
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #11 from Tim Shen ---
Author: timshen
Date: Tue Jul 1 03:05:45 2014
New Revision: 212185
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212185&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/61061
PR libstdc++/61582
* include/bits/regex_autom
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #10 from Maksymilian Arciemowicz ---
There is also one other alternative like this
http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/lib/libc/regex/regcomp.c.diff?r1=1.29&r2=1.30&f=h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #9 from Tim Shen ---
(In reply to Maksymilian Arciemowicz from comment #8)
> (In reply to Tim Shen from comment #7)
> > "(.*{100}{100}{100})" seems to be a stack overflow. It's because regex
> > executor uses recursion. It could be fi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #8 from Maksymilian Arciemowicz ---
(In reply to Tim Shen from comment #7)
> "(.*{100}{100}{100})" seems to be a stack overflow. It's because regex
> executor uses recursion. It could be fixed (not segfault but memory
> exhaustion) by
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #7 from Tim Shen ---
"(.*{100}{100}{100})" seems to be a stack overflow. It's because regex executor
uses recursion. It could be fixed (not segfault but memory exhaustion) by using
a std::stack and simulate recursion; IMH, however, di
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #6 from Maksymilian Arciemowicz ---
@Jonathan: true but check this case
cx@cx:~/REtrunk/kozak5$ ~/gccTRUNK/bin/g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/home/cx/gccTRUNK/bin/g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/home/cx/gccTRUNK/libexec/gcc/x86_6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
--- Comment #5 from Maksymilian Arciemowicz ---
Thanks for feedback. I'm going verify this on trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||timshen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61582
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Last reconfirmed|
23 matches
Mail list logo
