mirror of
https://github.com/signalwire/freeswitch.git
synced 2026-11-15 13:58:32 +00:00
update to pcre 7.9
git-svn-id: http://svn.freeswitch.org/svn/freeswitch/trunk@13706 d0543943-73ff-0310-b7d9-9358b9ac24b2
This commit is contained in:
1 parent
a1e5add731
commit
f7efdaa901
178 files changed
+43556
-11378
No files matched your search
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ is matched against the string
|
||||
<something> <something else> <something further>
|
||||
.sp
|
||||
there are three possible answers. The standard algorithm finds only one of
|
||||
them, whereas the DFA algorithm finds all three.
|
||||
them, whereas the alternative algorithm finds all three.
|
||||
.
|
||||
.SH "REGULAR EXPRESSIONS AS TREES"
|
||||
.rs
|
||||
@@ -41,8 +41,8 @@ correspond to the two matching algorithms provided by PCRE.
|
||||
.SH "THE STANDARD MATCHING ALGORITHM"
|
||||
.rs
|
||||
.sp
|
||||
In the terminology of Jeffrey Friedl's book \fIMastering Regular
|
||||
Expressions\fP, the standard algorithm is an "NFA algorithm". It conducts a
|
||||
In the terminology of Jeffrey Friedl's book "Mastering Regular
|
||||
Expressions", the standard algorithm is an "NFA algorithm". It conducts a
|
||||
depth-first search of the pattern tree. That is, it proceeds along a single
|
||||
path through the tree, checking that the subject matches what is required. When
|
||||
there is a mismatch, the algorithm tries any alternatives at the current point,
|
||||
@@ -63,15 +63,16 @@ straightforward for this algorithm to keep track of the substrings that are
|
||||
matched by portions of the pattern in parentheses. This provides support for
|
||||
capturing parentheses and back references.
|
||||
.
|
||||
.SH "THE DFA MATCHING ALGORITHM"
|
||||
.SH "THE ALTERNATIVE MATCHING ALGORITHM"
|
||||
.rs
|
||||
.sp
|
||||
DFA stands for "deterministic finite automaton", but you do not need to
|
||||
understand the origins of that name. This algorithm conducts a breadth-first
|
||||
search of the tree. Starting from the first matching point in the subject, it
|
||||
scans the subject string from left to right, once, character by character, and
|
||||
as it does this, it remembers all the paths through the tree that represent
|
||||
valid matches.
|
||||
This algorithm conducts a breadth-first search of the tree. Starting from the
|
||||
first matching point in the subject, it scans the subject string from left to
|
||||
right, once, character by character, and as it does this, it remembers all the
|
||||
paths through the tree that represent valid matches. In Friedl's terminology,
|
||||
this is a kind of "DFA algorithm", though it is not implemented as a
|
||||
traditional finite state machine (it keeps multiple states active
|
||||
simultaneously).
|
||||
.P
|
||||
The scan continues until either the end of the subject is reached, or there are
|
||||
no more unterminated paths. At this point, terminated paths represent the
|
||||
@@ -92,11 +93,20 @@ character of the subject. The algorithm does not automatically move on to find
|
||||
matches that start at later positions.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
There are a number of features of PCRE regular expressions that are not
|
||||
supported by the DFA matching algorithm. They are as follows:
|
||||
supported by the alternative matching algorithm. They are as follows:
|
||||
.P
|
||||
1. Because the algorithm finds all possible matches, the greedy or ungreedy
|
||||
nature of repetition quantifiers is not relevant. Greedy and ungreedy
|
||||
quantifiers are treated in exactly the same way.
|
||||
quantifiers are treated in exactly the same way. However, possessive
|
||||
quantifiers can make a difference when what follows could also match what is
|
||||
quantified, for example in a pattern like this:
|
||||
.sp
|
||||
^a++\ew!
|
||||
.sp
|
||||
This pattern matches "aaab!" but not "aaa!", which would be matched by a
|
||||
non-possessive quantifier. Similarly, if an atomic group is present, it is
|
||||
matched as if it were a standalone pattern at the current point, and the
|
||||
longest match is then "locked in" for the rest of the overall pattern.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
2. When dealing with multiple paths through the tree simultaneously, it is not
|
||||
straightforward to keep track of captured substrings for the different matching
|
||||
@@ -107,21 +117,27 @@ do this. This means that no captured substrings are available.
|
||||
not supported, and cause errors if encountered.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
4. For the same reason, conditional expressions that use a backreference as the
|
||||
condition are not supported.
|
||||
condition or test for a specific group recursion are not supported.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
5. Callouts are supported, but the value of the \fIcapture_top\fP field is
|
||||
5. Because many paths through the tree may be active, the \eK escape sequence,
|
||||
which resets the start of the match when encountered (but may be on some paths
|
||||
and not on others), is not supported. It causes an error if encountered.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
6. Callouts are supported, but the value of the \fIcapture_top\fP field is
|
||||
always 1, and the value of the \fIcapture_last\fP field is always -1.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
6.
|
||||
The \eC escape sequence, which (in the standard algorithm) matches a single
|
||||
byte, even in UTF-8 mode, is not supported because the DFA algorithm moves
|
||||
through the subject string one character at a time, for all active paths
|
||||
7. The \eC escape sequence, which (in the standard algorithm) matches a single
|
||||
byte, even in UTF-8 mode, is not supported because the alternative algorithm
|
||||
moves through the subject string one character at a time, for all active paths
|
||||
through the tree.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
8. Except for (*FAIL), the backtracking control verbs such as (*PRUNE) are not
|
||||
supported. (*FAIL) is supported, and behaves like a failing negative assertion.
|
||||
.
|
||||
.SH "ADVANTAGES OF THE DFA ALGORITHM"
|
||||
.SH "ADVANTAGES OF THE ALTERNATIVE ALGORITHM"
|
||||
.rs
|
||||
.sp
|
||||
Using the DFA matching algorithm provides the following advantages:
|
||||
Using the alternative matching algorithm provides the following advantages:
|
||||
.P
|
||||
1. All possible matches (at a single point in the subject) are automatically
|
||||
found, and in particular, the longest match is found. To find more than one
|
||||
@@ -130,17 +146,18 @@ callouts.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
2. There is much better support for partial matching. The restrictions on the
|
||||
content of the pattern that apply when using the standard algorithm for partial
|
||||
matching do not apply to the DFA algorithm. For non-anchored patterns, the
|
||||
starting position of a partial match is available.
|
||||
matching do not apply to the alternative algorithm. For non-anchored patterns,
|
||||
the starting position of a partial match is available.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
3. Because the DFA algorithm scans the subject string just once, and never
|
||||
needs to backtrack, it is possible to pass very long subject strings to the
|
||||
matching function in several pieces, checking for partial matching each time.
|
||||
3. Because the alternative algorithm scans the subject string just once, and
|
||||
never needs to backtrack, it is possible to pass very long subject strings to
|
||||
the matching function in several pieces, checking for partial matching each
|
||||
time.
|
||||
.
|
||||
.SH "DISADVANTAGES OF THE DFA ALGORITHM"
|
||||
.SH "DISADVANTAGES OF THE ALTERNATIVE ALGORITHM"
|
||||
.rs
|
||||
.sp
|
||||
The DFA algorithm suffers from a number of disadvantages:
|
||||
The alternative algorithm suffers from a number of disadvantages:
|
||||
.P
|
||||
1. It is substantially slower than the standard algorithm. This is partly
|
||||
because it has to search for all possible matches, but is also because it is
|
||||
@@ -148,10 +165,24 @@ less susceptible to optimization.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
2. Capturing parentheses and back references are not supported.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
3. The "atomic group" feature of PCRE regular expressions is supported, but
|
||||
does not provide the advantage that it does for the standard algorithm.
|
||||
.P
|
||||
.in 0
|
||||
Last updated: 06 June 2006
|
||||
.br
|
||||
Copyright (c) 1997-2006 University of Cambridge.
|
||||
3. Although atomic groups are supported, their use does not provide the
|
||||
performance advantage that it does for the standard algorithm.
|
||||
.
|
||||
.
|
||||
.SH AUTHOR
|
||||
.rs
|
||||
.sp
|
||||
.nf
|
||||
Philip Hazel
|
||||
University Computing Service
|
||||
Cambridge CB2 3QH, England.
|
||||
.fi
|
||||
.
|
||||
.
|
||||
.SH REVISION
|
||||
.rs
|
||||
.sp
|
||||
.nf
|
||||
Last updated: 19 April 2008
|
||||
Copyright (c) 1997-2008 University of Cambridge.
|
||||
.fi
|
||||
Reference in new issue
Block a user