Subject: Re: the state of regex(3) (was: Policy questions)
To: Ben Harris <>
From: Jaromir Dolecek <>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 01/04/2004 13:16:25
Ben Harris wrote:
> In article <> you write:
> >PCRE is very fast and stable too (as well as being very well
> >documented), but although it includes a POSIX API it only implements
> >Perl-compatible EREs, not true POSIX EREs.  I seriously doubt Philip
> >would consider relicensing it under a more BSD-like copyright though,
> >but I suppose it wouldn't hurt to ask.
> PCRE's license is practically 4-clause BSDish, even if the words are
> different.  I suspect if there were anything that needed changing to make it
> acceptable to TNF, Phil would be happy to consider it.

Would be nice to evaluate PCRE as possible regex engine replacement.
It's definitely much more widely used, and thus hopefully faster
and even more stable than what we have now. Anyone would want to
do some performance comparisons?

What is missing in PCRE from true POSIX EREs, BTW?

Jaromir Dolecek <>  
-=- We should be mindful of the potential goal, but as the Buddhist -=-
-=- masters say, ``You may notice during meditation that you        -=-
-=- sometimes levitate or glow.   Do not let this distract you.''   -=-