Re: for 21.4? regex fix [Re: regular expression question]
>>>> "Ben" == Ben Wing <ben(a)666.com>
writes:
i would love it if you'd consider working on the xemacs
regexp engine. [and your patches will certainly go in.] we made many
changes for mule though so our version is somewhat different. people have
also implemented the *? and +? constructs. [did you do this as well?]
I actually started with *? and +? (because I thought I wanted them for
a little hack in diff-mode.el. I discovered much later on that I could
have used \(\|foo\)* to simulate \(foo\)*?) and got carried away
implementing \(?:...\) for XEmacs compatibility.
btw what other bugs should i know about?
Can't remember. I know I fixed a number of bugs, but most of them were
introduced by my changes.
can you send me your patch?
As I said the patch is as large as the file. Also my patch tries to
abstract away some of the multibyte-handling code in the hope of
making it possible/easy to get it work for libc's wchar.
My guess is that it will be easier to port the new code to XEmacs than
to merge the changing into XEmacs' code.
I'd be happy to see my code used for XEmacs and would be happy to help,
but I won't do it myself. Also, I'd be interested to try and merge back
into Emacs' code whatever changes were needed for XEmacs.
Stefan
PS: here are two patches between XEmacs' regex.c version 1.22.2.12
and Emacs' regex.c before and after my changes as well as the current
regex.[ch].
Attachments:
- regex.c.log (text/plain — 18.6 KB)
- regex.c.after.diff (text/x-patch — 318.5 KB)
- regex.c.before.diff (text/x-patch — 286.7 KB)
- regex.c (text/x-c-code — 173.0 KB)
- regex.h (text/x-c-code — 20.9 KB)