Please DON'T move to PCRE. "Outside world standards"? There are so many. There are two important things to know about PCRE: (1) it is a popular open source regexp library for Perl-style regexps, (2) because of that, it is prone to truly horrendous performance problems. There are alternatives, such as re2, https://github.com/google/re2 , which are not subject to PCRE's intrinsic performance pathologies. As it happens, re2 supports *? +? and ??.
On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 at 20:34, Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Yes, Pharo regex implementation is very naive. > We will be moving to a PCRE binding to match outside world standards but > we have not had the time to work on it :( > > Esteban > > > On 5 Feb 2019, at 00:27, Manuel Leuenberger <leuenber...@inf.unibe.ch> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I just noticed that the Pharo regexes do not understand non-greedy > matches. A regex engine to be PCRE is kind of essential, not having '.*?' > to be a parseable and working regex is a bummer. Are there any more > powerful regex engines around for Pharo? I could not find any. > > > > Cheers, > > Manuel > > > > > > >
