Re: PCRE library requirement

[Rik]

Richard Campbell wrote:
> On Jan 31, 2011, at 4:54 PM, Rik wrote:
> 
>>>>>> str = "a ab abc"
>>>>>> results = regexp (str, '\w+', "match")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If that fails because the actual libraries are truly POSIX
>>>>> compliant then I
>>>>>> think we should make PCRE a requirement. It is widely available and a
>>>>>> number of patterns in the code use the very convenient '\s' or '\w'
>>>>>> patterns rather than character classes.
> 
> 
> octave:1> str = "a ab abc"
> str = a ab abc
> octave:2> results = regexp (str, '\w+', "match")
> results = {}(1x0)
> 
Okay, this confirms that POSIX RE aren't going to be enough without
extensive verification of the Octave source code.  At least having PCRE as
a requirement will simplify things in Octave as there will be only one
syntax to support.

--Rik