look-behind regexp ?

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Shajith, Mar 30, 2005.

  1. Shajith

    Shajith Guest

    Shajith, Mar 30, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Hi,

    In message "Re: look-behind regexp ?"
    on Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:48:18 +0900, Shajith <> writes:

    |Are there any plans to support look-behinds in the core regexp engine?

    1.9 Oniguruma regexp engine already has one.

    matz.
    Yukihiro Matsumoto, Mar 30, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Shajith

    Shajith Guest

    On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:58:08 +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto
    <> wrote:
    >
    > 1.9 Oniguruma regexp engine already has one.
    >
    > matz.

    Thanks!

    Shajith
    Shajith, Mar 30, 2005
    #3
  4. Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
    > Shajith <> writes:
    >> Are there any plans to support look-behinds in the core regexp
    >> engine?

    >
    > 1.9 Oniguruma regexp engine already has one.


    Where can I read more about this regexp engine? How does it compare to:

    * Perl's own regexps
    * regexp-engine from AEditor (http://aeditor.rubyforge.org/)
    * PCRE (http://www.pcre.org/)


    Thanks,
    --binkley
    B. K. Oxley (binkley), Mar 30, 2005
    #4
  5. Florian Gross, Mar 30, 2005
    #5
  6. Florian Gross wrote:
    > http://www.geocities.jp/kosako3/oniguruma/doc/RE.txt seems to have a
    > fairly complete listing of its features.


    Ah, yes. Thanks. I should have Googled first. :)

    But reading through that and the documentation on the same site, I am
    still looking for a rationale document. Why Onigurama and not, say,
    PCRE? Why a new regexp parser?


    Cheers,
    --binkley
    B. K. Oxley (binkley), Mar 30, 2005
    #6
  7. On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:29:03 +0900, B. K. Oxley (binkley)
    <> wrote:
    > Florian Gross wrote:
    > > http://www.geocities.jp/kosako3/oniguruma/doc/RE.txt seems to have a
    > > fairly complete listing of its features.

    > Ah, yes. Thanks. I should have Googled first. :)
    >
    > But reading through that and the documentation on the same site, I am
    > still looking for a rationale document. Why Onigurama and not, say,
    > PCRE? Why a new regexp parser?


    1. Licensing. PCRE's licensing has been somewhat fluid. The current
    release seems OK.
    2. Control. In many ways, such a core feature to Ruby should be native to Ruby.
    3. Native concepts. Ruby REs are a bit different because they end up
    being objects.

    -austin
    --
    Austin Ziegler *
    * Alternate:
    Austin Ziegler, Mar 30, 2005
    #7
  8. Austin Ziegler wrote:
    > 1. Licensing. PCRE's licensing has been somewhat fluid. The current
    > release seems OK.
    > 2. Control. In many ways, such a core feature to Ruby should be native to Ruby.
    > 3. Native concepts. Ruby REs are a bit different because they end up
    > being objects.


    Hrm.

    In all honesty, these objections seem weak to me.

    If the licensing is not a problem right now, why would it necessarily
    become one in the future? (Although I don't know the history of
    licensing in PCRE, so perhaps it has a record of arbitrariness.)

    Control is not so important when you have the source code. And Ruby can
    contribute to the development of PCRE.

    I'm unsure what you mean in point three. I presume that a Ruby regexp
    implementation would use PCRE for implementation, wrapping any details
    so that the implementation is not visible, and only objects remain.

    Not to be so nitpicky, I only used PCRE as an example. I have an
    inherent dislike of wheel-reinvention (my natural laziness at play), so
    my ears perk up when I see something like a rewrite of regexp parsers
    when so many fine ones are already around.


    Cheers,
    --binkley
    B. K. Oxley (binkley), Mar 30, 2005
    #8
  9. Hi,

    In message "Re: look-behind regexp ?"
    on Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:29:03 +0900, "B. K. Oxley (binkley)" <> writes:

    |But reading through that and the documentation on the same site, I am
    |still looking for a rationale document. Why Onigurama and not, say,
    |PCRE? Why a new regexp parser?

    PCRE does only support UTF-8 (as far as I know), not multiple
    encodings like Ruby does. Oniguruma supports UTF-8, UTF-16,
    ISO-8859-*, EUC-JP, Shift_JIS, and lot more.

    matz.
    Yukihiro Matsumoto, Mar 30, 2005
    #9
  10. Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
    > PCRE does only support UTF-8 (as far as I know), not multiple
    > encodings like Ruby does. Oniguruma supports UTF-8, UTF-16,
    > ISO-8859-*, EUC-JP, Shift_JIS, and lot more.


    Ah. I inferred as much from the prominence given the list of encodings,
    but wanted to find out more.


    Thanks,
    --binkley
    B. K. Oxley (binkley), Mar 30, 2005
    #10
  11. In message "Re: look-behind regexp ?"
    on Thu, 31 Mar 2005 01:08:50 +0900, "B. K. Oxley (binkley)" <> writes:

    |Ah. I inferred as much from the prominence given the list of encodings,
    |but wanted to find out more.

    Here's the list of encodings supported by default:

    ASCII BIG5 EUC-KR EUC-JP EUC-TW
    ISO8859-1 ISO8859-2 ISO8859-3
    ISO8859-4 ISO8859-5 ISO8859-6
    ISO8859-7 ISO8859-8 ISO8859-9
    ISO8859-10 ISO8859-11 ISO8859-13
    ISO8859-14 ISO8859-15 ISO8859-16
    KOI8 KOI8-R Shift_JIS UTF-8
    UTF-16BE UTF-16LE UTF-32BE UTF-32LE

    And more importantly, its encoding support is pluggable, you can add
    new encoding support by writing callback routines.

    matz.
    Yukihiro Matsumoto, Mar 30, 2005
    #11
  12. * Christian Neukirchen (Mar 31, 2005 14:45):
    > Is there any reason not to use Oniguruma for 1.8.3?


    It's still under very heavy development,
    nikolai

    --
    ::: name: Nikolai Weibull :: aliases: pcp / lone-star / aka :::
    ::: born: Chicago, IL USA :: loc atm: Gothenburg, Sweden :::
    ::: page: minimalistic.org :: fun atm: gf,lps,ruby,lisp,war3 :::
    main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}
    Nikolai Weibull, Mar 31, 2005
    #12
  13. Shajith

    George Ogata Guest

    George Ogata, Apr 2, 2005
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Bhargava

    Negative look-behind

    Bhargava, Jun 1, 2004, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    486
    Paul McGuire
    Jun 7, 2004
  2. inhahe
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    2,324
    Diez B. Roggisch
    Jan 28, 2005
  3. Peng Yu
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    275
    Steven D'Aprano
    Oct 24, 2008
  4. Joao Silva
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    342
    7stud --
    Aug 21, 2009
  5. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    161
Loading...

Share This Page