3 ms·
I find it weird to have the Perl innovation (?:...) be called "traditional regex". Perl was rather innovative back then, even if it's more than 30 years ago now
by gpvos 7mo ago
I find it weird to have the Perl innovation (?:...) be called "traditional regex". Perl was rather innovative back then, even if it's more than 30 years ago now. Traditional regex is what came before it (grep -E being the most advanced form). I wonder what counts as nontraditional in the author's eyes.
- leoc 7mo agoIn my head a regex-like thing of Perl origin is known as a 'perlex'.
- MathMonkeyMan 7mo agocan call it PCRE now
- leoc 7mo ago'PCRE' never really caught on broadly, unfortunately. It seems that Boost actually uses 'perlex' https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_31_0/libs/regex/doc/syntax_option_type.html https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_31_0/libs/regex/doc/syntax_... .
- ieviev 7mo agoHaha, you're right about that. I was looking for another word for "default"
- coldtea 7mo ago>even if it's more than 30 years ago now. Here's your answer. >Traditional regex is what came before it No, that's "ancient regex".
- trashb 7mo ago> No, that's "ancient regex". wouldn't the "ancient regex" be the ed "g/re/p" version? -E, --extended-regexp Interpret PATTERNS as extended regular expressions (EREs, see below). -G, --basic-regexp Interpret PATTERNS as basic regular expressions (BREs, see below). This is the default. -P, --perl-regexp Interpret I<PATTERNS> as Perl-compatible regular expressions (PCREs). This option is experimental when combined with the -z (--null-data) option, and grep -P may warn of unimplemented features. From the manpage it seems my grep make distinction between "Extended" "Basic" and "Perl" regexes.
- coldtea 7mo ago>wouldn't the "ancient regex" be the ed "g/re/p" version? That's "prehistoric regex"