Re: regex documentation

[Paul Eggert]

On 5/11/22 04:18, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Reuben Thomas wrote:
> > > I'm happy to prepare a patch in this case. I would simply remove all
> > > mention of syntax tables, as that functionality is no longer available.
> >
> > Attached.
>
> Thanks! Looks good to me, except that the comma in line 111 is superfluous.
> Paul, OK with you as well?

Only thing I spotted offhand was that \s and \S mean something entirely 
different in glibc as syntax classes are not programmable.