Re: Dealing with character ranges in grep

[Aharon Robbins]

Hi.

> From: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:11:32 +0200
> Subject: Re: Dealing with character ranges in grep
> To: Aharon Robbins <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden,
>         address@hidden
>
> > ? In principle, I'm all for this, but in practice, I'm going to leave gawk's
> > ? code alone for now (there's always 4.1 :-).
>
> As long as --posix is not affecting the choice, that's fine.  However,
> please make sure that compiling gawk --without-included-regex works
> (it should go without saying)!

I was wrong. Gawk doesn't have --with[out]-included-regex.  Maybe at one
point it did, but no longer.

> But we do have control over gnulib, and the current choice there
> already doesn't match glibc's (strcoll-order doesn't always match
> glibc's collation equivalent ordering), so there's good reason to
> switch at least gnulib.

Makes sense.  It'd be nice to see some convergence amongst the three
different regexes, but I don't have the energy to tackle this.

Thanks,

Arnold