In article <zo955+sp0h7ez...@polynum.com>, <tlaro...@polynum.com> wrote: >On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 02:32:25PM -0000, Christos Zoulas wrote: >> In article <a2ba5261-bf4a-f3c7-c614-c54088391...@sdf.org>, >> RVP <r...@sdf.org> wrote: >> >On Wed, 26 Jul 2023, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote: >> > >> >> $ export LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.ISO8859-15 >> >> >> >> and then: >> >> >> >> $ echo "??" | sed 's/??\é/g' >> >> sed: 1: "s/??\é/g": RE error: trailing backslash (\) >> >> >> > >> >Not running NetBSD right now, but, FreeBSD 13.2 has the same issue which >> >can be seen even with a plain grep(1)--as it relies on the libc regexp >> >engine. >> > >> >Can you try the patch below (it is for NetBSD): >> >> Why don't we make next and end unsigned char so that all instances are fixed? > >Because one needs to review all the macros and all the invocations of >the macros because there are comparison between next and other >characters, and comparing unsigned char on one side and signed char on >the other is sure to introduce another can of worms. > >I think RVP and I are in agreement about this: the whole lib should be >carefully reviewed. The patch proposed by RVP (the two casts, last patch >attached to the PR) is safe, correcting a fault and not modifying >something else; perhaps---and even probably--- not correcting all >the faults but at least, immediately, not introducing new ones. > >I would have preferred that the library be "eight bits" clean >, i.e. handling correctly the C language---ASCII--- >and treating the extra range as is, with higher level libraries, if user >wants them, dealing with extended character sets and regex in order to >"compile" them to basic ones running on the core library, the way >microcode is converting CISC into RISC, with a core more simple (no >extended chars), sticking to C, and so more easy to make or prove >correct (the higher library explaining character classes and so on >according to the lang and the encoding etc.). > >This whole "i18n" and "l10n" is a nightmare---and this is a not english >native speaker who writes it...
It is not that much code to review; I reviewed it and committed the minimal change. There were 3 places where GETNEXT was promoted and not assigned to a char. Best, christos
