Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
To:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
Cc:	dj AT redhat DOT com, gcc AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org, gdb AT sources DOT redhat DOT com,
	binutils AT sources DOT redhat DOT com, cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject:	Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty
In-Reply-To:	<9003-Fri08Jun2001100651+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
References:	<9003-Fri08Jun2001100651+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Mailer:	Mew version 1.94b25 on Emacs 20.7 / Mule 4.0 (HANANOEN)
X-URL:	http://www.codesourcery.com
Organization:	CodeSourcery, LLC
From:	Mark Mitchell <mark AT codesourcery DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
Message-Id:	<20010608091753L.mitchell@codesourcery.com>
Date:	Fri, 08 Jun 2001 09:17:53 -0700
X-Dispatcher:	imput version 990425(IM115)
Lines:	14

>>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> writes:

    >> The two contenders seem to be a modified GNU regex and the
    >> ever-popular Henry Spencer's regex.  Does anyone have any
    >> strong opinions for either of these, or against any regex in
    >> libiberty at all?

My opinion may or may not matter on this debate, but here it is.
Since libiberty for use in GNU software, we must use GNU regex.  If
GNU regex is slow, we should make it faster.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark AT codesourcery DOT com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -