[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working
From: |
Brian Zwahr |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working |
Date: |
Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:31:39 -0600 |
Ah ha. Thanks! I see the mention in the BSD `info ed`. I assume you're right.
Perhaps the Homebrew formula can be changed to build against a regex
implementation that includes support for \+, etc.
Either way, though, shouldn't the GNU ed manual (I linked it in a previous
message) mention needing extensions or a specific regular expressions
implementation in order for all operators, like \+, to work? The BSD ed man
page mentions it, as you've pointed out. The GNU ed documentation should also
mention it.
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019, at 4:23 PM, John Cowan wrote:
> Oops, sorry, I was looking at info ed, which is the BSD ed. Info ged says
> they are supported. So it looks like it's a brew problem: ed is being built
> against a pure Posix regular expression package, probably a BSD one.
>
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 5:21 PM John Cowan <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Info ed is the source of the statement that what regex things work depends
>> on the regex package ed was built with. Jump down to COMMANDS and it's
>> right above that, the last paragraph in the REGULAR EXPRESSIONS section.
>>
>> The link to the Posix standard is the source of the statement that \+ etc.
>> are not defined in Posix basic REs.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:40 PM Brian Zwahr <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Thanks for the response. I didn't realize any of that. The GNU ed manual
>>> makes no mention of that on the Regular Expressions page. It just lists \+
>>> as valid. Does the manual need to be updated to include this information?
>>> Additionally, I've checked `info ed` and I don't see anything about
>>> extensions or only having access to things like \+ conditionally based upon
>>> how ed was compiled or installed. Am I just not seeing it in the info?
>>> Which page is it on?
>>>
>>> https://www.gnu.org/software/ed/manual/ed_manual.html#Regular-expressions
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019, at 3:07 PM, John Cowan wrote:
>>> > ed uses Posix basic REs, and the use of \+ in basic REs to get the
>>> effect of + in extended REs is a non-Posix extension. See
>>> <http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/V1_chap09.html#tag_09_05_01>,
>>> where there is no mention of \+ except its use in extended REs. The same
>>> is true of escaped ?, (, ), |, {.
>>> >
>>> > The `info ed` command documents that exactly which regular expression
>>> characters work depends on the regex package with which ed was built.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan address@hidden
>>> > He made the Legislature meet at one-horse tank-towns out in the alfalfa
>>> > belt, so that hardly nobody could get there and most of the leaders
>>> > would stay home and let him go to work and do things as he pleased.
>>> > --H.L. Mencken's translation of the Declaration of Independence
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 3:52 PM Brian Zwahr <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> >> I'm having an issue where using \+ to search for multiple matches isn't
>>> working. Am I doing something wrong?
>>> >>
>>> >> I have GNU ed 1.14.2 installed on the latest macOS through Homebrew
>>> (https://brew.sh). Homebrew installed the executable as ged instead of ed,
>>> to not overtake the BSD ed that ships with macOS. I mention this so you
>>> understand why the command I'm running is ged instead of ed.
>>> >>
>>> >> I see that 1.15 is in pre-release, but I don't see this issue
>>> addressed in the changelogs I'm seeing in the archives of this list.
>>> >>
>>> >> Here are steps to reproduce:
>>> >>
>>> >> $ ged -v
>>> >> # Let's add a couple of lines.
>>> >> a
>>> >> foobar
>>> >> bazfoo
>>> >> .
>>> >> # Great! Now, let's search for "o".
>>> >> g/o/
>>> >> foobar
>>> >> bazfoo
>>> >> # Both lines match. Perfect. Now, let's search for multiple "o"s.
>>> >> g/o\+/
>>> >> # Not found? :-(
>>> >> q
>>> >> ?
>>> >> Warning: buffer modified
>>> >> q
>>> >>
>>> >> Proof of version:
>>> >>
>>> >> $ ged -V
>>> >> GNU ed 1.14.2
>>> >> Copyright (C) 1994 Andrew L. Moore.
>>> >> Copyright (C) 2017 Antonio Diaz Diaz.
>>> >> License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later
>>> <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>
>>> >> This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
>>> >> There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> bug-ed mailing list
>>> >> address@hidden
>>> >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-ed
- [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, Brian Zwahr, 2019/01/02
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, John Cowan, 2019/01/02
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, Brian Zwahr, 2019/01/02
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, John Cowan, 2019/01/02
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, John Cowan, 2019/01/02
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working,
Brian Zwahr <=
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, Antonio Diaz Diaz, 2019/01/02
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, Brian Zwahr, 2019/01/02
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, Bob Proulx, 2019/01/02
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, Brian Zwahr, 2019/01/03
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, Antonio Diaz Diaz, 2019/01/03
- [Bug-ed] Mailman HTML email configuration (was: Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working), Bob Proulx, 2019/01/18
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, Antonio Diaz Diaz, 2019/01/03
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, Brian Zwahr, 2019/01/04
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, Antonio Diaz Diaz, 2019/01/04
- Re: [Bug-ed] Searching for multiple matches with \+ isn't working, Brian Zwahr, 2019/01/04