1. PCRE ticket review
- Posted by ChrisB (moderator) Nov 23, 2022
- 1590 views
Hi
So, I'm going to plough my way through the tickets (and the manual), and see if they are feasible to continue, or have any point at all.
PCRE - Perl compatible regluar expressions - was updated to version 2 in 2010. Who noticed? Were you unhappy with version one (before 2010). Does PCRE do the job it needs to, and if so is there any need / point to upgrade to 2.
How much extra work will be needed to integrate PCRE2? Or could it be not compiled in, but used as a dll if required, with an include to wrap it.
My take, I'm fine with PCRE1, as I've possibly only used it once, and I tend to write my own search functions.
Thoughts please. I'll give you 5 days to give me a reason not to mark it completed.
Cheers, Chris
2. Re: PCRE ticket review
- Posted by jmduro Nov 24, 2022
- 1479 views
I'm happy with the actual version . I used it this year in various projects as the class preprocessor.
Jean-Marc
4. Re: PCRE ticket review
- Posted by ghaberek (admin) Nov 28, 2022
- 924 views
I updated the latest code to use PCRE 8.45 back in January of this year (See 3af58d7) which is considered the "last" release of PCRE. So yes, the solution would be to migrate to PCRE2 for a later release.
Given the difficulty in maintaining a large code base that incorporates sources from several other projects, I'm leaning towards some sort of "package" system and moving things like PCRE2 as an external library.
-Greg
5. Re: PCRE ticket review
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Jan 25, 2023
- 778 views
I updated the latest code to use PCRE 8.45 back in January of this year (See 3af58d7) which is considered the "last" release of PCRE. So yes, the solution would be to migrate to PCRE2 for a later release.
I think this is reasonable. Though I'd prefer the later release be 4.2.0 or 4.3.0 instead of 5.0 - but depends on when we have bandwidth to tackle this on.
Given the difficulty in maintaining a large code base that incorporates sources from several other projects, I'm leaning towards some sort of "package" system and moving things like PCRE2 as an external library.
-Greg
Agree 100%. In fact, the only reason why we didn't do this originally for PCRE1 was we added that in so long ago that we were trying to support DOS. Had we dropped DOS first, then we would have used PCRE1 as an external library.
(Even then, I was working with Jeremy in an attempt to find smaller alternatives to embed, as PCRE1 was nearly too large for comfort. We almost went with a different tiny embeded regex library for DOS and the external PCRE1 for the other platforms.)
