Re: documentation around RE repetition metachars may need clarification

[Andrew J. Schorr]

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 10:47:37AM -0500, Ed Morton wrote:
> Andy - it's not what the gawk manual says about gawks behavior that's the
> issue, it's what the gawk manual says about POSIX awk's behavior ("`+` at the
> start of a regexp is a literal char") since it doesn't match what the POSIX
> spec says about POSIX awk's behavior ("`+` at the start of a regexp is
> undefined"). Yes, gawk or any other awk can do whatever it likes for behavior
> that's undefined by POSIX, as in this case, and no I don't expect gawk to 
> throw
> an error (but a lint warning would be useful for people looking to write
> portable scripts to ensure they aren't doing anything undefined).

Ah, OK, that makes sense. My fault for reading it too quickly.

Regards,
Andy