Magnus Bodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said something to this effect on 11/09/2001:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 08:32:33PM -0700, Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
> >
> > I'd be willing to bet that perl's implementation of regex is starkly
> > different than mutt's.
>
> mutts regexp == POSIX?
> Is it gnu or cl
On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 10:09:42AM +0100, Magnus Bodin (dis)graced my inbox with:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 08:32:33PM -0700, Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
> >
> > I'd be willing to bet that perl's implementation of regex is starkly
> > different than mutt's.
>
> mutts regexp == POSIX?
> Is it gnu o
On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 08:32:33PM -0700, Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
>
> I'd be willing to bet that perl's implementation of regex is starkly
> different than mutt's.
mutts regexp == POSIX?
Is it gnu or classic Henry Spencer?
/magnus
On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 11:08:30PM -0300, Robson Braga Araujo (dis)graced my inbox
with:
> > If you are testing $reply_regexp: It's case *insensitive*. So just
> > write "re" instead of "[Rr][Ee]". Maybe this helps you to find the
> > error.
>
> I know, I wrote it in perl to test and then cut
On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 11:50:00PM +0100, Volker Moell wrote:
> Robson Braga Araujo wrote:
> >
> > I would like to know why a regular expression like
> > '^(\[[^]]+\] *[Rr][Ee](\[[0-9]+\])?: *)|([Rr][Ee](\[[0-9]+\])?: *\[[^]]+\]
>*)(([Rr][Ee](\[[0-9]+\])?: *)?(\[[^]]+\] *)?)*'
> > does not work
Robson Braga Araujo wrote:
>
> I would like to know why a regular expression like
> '^(\[[^]]+\] *[Rr][Ee](\[[0-9]+\])?: *)|([Rr][Ee](\[[0-9]+\])?: *\[[^]]+\]
>*)(([Rr][Ee](\[[0-9]+\])?: *)?(\[[^]]+\] *)?)*'
> does not work in mutt.
If you are testing $reply_regexp: It's case *insensitive*. S
