- From: Albert Lunde <Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu>
- Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 22:52:02 -0600
- To: www-style@w3.org
I'm personally rather fond of Perl regular expressions, and I think they are rather expressive. But I think it would be non-trivial to specify them without just swiping the code. And if you don't pin down who's varient of regular expressions you mean, interoperablity goes to hell fast. (But, Javascript seems like a worse solution to put in what's trying to be a declaritive language.) I seem to recall there were also some security issues once related to the side effects of perl regular expressions. Regular expressions can use so many assorted characters that they can also be a pain to "quote" in other contents. I'd be tempted to try for the same expressive power in a more verbose syntax: I once used a homegrown mainframe editor that used pattern matching loosely based on SNOBOL functions. But then people would have to learn another arcane syntax. (The advantage was you could make, say "*", mean whatever you wanted it to mean in a particular context.) For what it's worth, regarding complexity, Henry Spencer's regular expression code, as shipped with Apache 1.2.5, contains a little over 100K or 4200 lines of C code. He claims to implement Posix 1003.2 Regular expressions. So I guess there's a spec to point at of you want one. --- Albert Lunde Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu
Received on Tuesday, 10 March 1998 23:53:14 UTC