[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: dfa.h / dfa.c diff versus gawk attached

From: Aharon Robbins
Subject: Re: dfa.h / dfa.c diff versus gawk attached
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 23:35:59 +0200

> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 15:33:47 -0500
> From: address@hidden (Karl Berry)
> Subject: Re: dfa.h / dfa.c diff versus gawk attached
> To: address@hidden
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
>     just as GLIBC is the canonical source for regex*.[hc].
> glibc => gnulib.  (The gnulib version is nearly the same as libc's,
> except it has some portability and other fixes that aren't in libc yet.)
> karl

Actually, NOT.  I tried, once, dropping the gnulib regex* into
gawk. It wouldn't fit without dragging in a ton of gnulib portability /
autoconf glop. (I would use a stronger word, but ...)

So, sorry. For now, my source for regex is GLIBC.  If / when gnulib
regex can be dropped into gawk without all the goo, I'll reconsider.

In the meantime, gawk's regex also has some fixes vis a vis glibc that
I don't think are in gnulib, but I don't have the cycles to do the merge.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]