- cl-ppcre-devel@lists.common-lisp.net - mailman3.common-lisp.net

[cl-ppcre-devel] New release 1.2.19
by Edi Weitz 16 Jan '07

16 Jan '07

ChangeLog: Version 1.2.19 2007-01-16 Fixed behaviour of look-behind in repeated scans (caught by RegexCoach user Hans Jud) Download: http://weitz.de/files/cl-ppcre.tar.gz Cheers, Edi.

1 0

[cl-ppcre-devel] scan's performance
by Igor Plekhov 28 Dec '06

28 Dec '06

It is on sbcl-0.9.16 under Linux. WILD> (time (scan (list :sequence :everything "abc") "foobar")) Evaluation took: 0.017 seconds of real time 0.006998 seconds of user run time 0.0 seconds of system run time 1 page fault and 4,456,456 bytes consed. NIL WILD> (time (scan (list :sequence :everything "abc" :everything) "foobar")) Evaluation took: 0.0 seconds of real time 0.0 seconds of user run time 0.0 seconds of system run time 0 page faults and 0 bytes consed. NIL Why so great difference? There must be two :everything around something to the trick to work. PS. Yes, I need a scan pattern generated at run time. With a static pattern it works incredibly fast, as usual. -- Registered Linux User #124759

2 1

[cl-ppcre-devel] *regex-char-code-limit*
by Alex Mizrahi 26 Nov '06

26 Nov '06

i have an implementation that reports char-code-limit less than actual -- it's ABCL (working on top of Java), only 256 codes are officially suported, but it uses Java strings, so there's no problem with handling Unicode strings -- i set *regex-char-code-limit* to some 10000 (thanks, Edi!). however, there are characters like 0xFFEF (the BOM), so i should set *regex-char-code-limit* to 65535. i think it's overkill to do that -- i see ppcre creates array of that size to do matching. how do people cope with it on unicode-enabled lisps? (afaik SteelBank uses UCS-4 char codes, so there's definitely no sane char-code-limit) does ppcre create that for each scanner? if there's one global array that's ok, but array for each scanner is too much.. does *use-bmh-matchers* affect usage of this array? if so, would it be much slower if i disable it?

2 1

Re: [cl-ppcre-devel] *regex-char-code-limit*
by Alex Mizrahi 26 Nov '06

26 Nov '06

> Hmm ... no! I can't think of a single use case where i would need to > treat the BOM as part of the content. Actually, i can only come to the > conclusion that a BOM within the content would be a serious bug. After > all, your appication should _never_ deal with the binary representation, > only with code points. What _code point_ do you get for BOM? i just download HTML pages using Java functions into Java strings. then i use CL-PPCRE to extract some information from it. certainly, i don't care about BOM, but CL-PPCRE crashes on it trying to aref array beyong char-code-limit. i can pre-filter data removing BOM, but i'm not guaranteed that i won't get some other wild character. well, there are better ways to tokenize HTML, but i've made quick and dirty solution via CL-PPCRE :)

1 0

[cl-ppcre-devel] New version 1.2.18
by Edi Weitz 12 Oct '06

12 Oct '06

ChangeLog: Version 1.2.18 2006-10-12 Changed default element type for LispWorks Fixed documentation for REGEX-REPLACE-ALL Download: http://weitz.de/files/cl-ppcre.tar.gz Cheers, Edi.

1 0

[cl-ppcre-devel] New version 1.2.17
by Edi Weitz 11 Oct '06

11 Oct '06

ChangeLog: Version 1.2.17 2006-10-11 Fixed bug in DO-SCANS which affected anchors (caught by RegexCoach user Laurent Taupiac) Update link for 'man perlre' (thanks to Ricardo Boccato Alves) Download: http://weitz.de/files/cl-ppcre.tar.gz Cheers, Edi.

1 0

[cl-ppcre-devel] Replacing all matches for a given register
by Daniel Gackle 15 Aug '06

15 Aug '06

I have a regex with more than one register and wish to replace each occurrence of one of those registers using a replacement function. I've written code to do this using do-scans, but it seems like there should be a simpler way. Is there? Thanks, Dan

2 2

[cl-ppcre-devel] cl-ppcre 1.2.12 and Lispworks 5.0
by Sean Ross 03 Aug '06

03 Aug '06

Hi, I've just run in to a small problem with cl-ppcre-1.2.12 and Lispworks 5.0 on Windows. It appears that the conditionalised import for 'lw:with-unique-names no longer has a compile-time effect which is resulting in some load errors. I've attached a small patch which wraps the import in an eval-when. Cheers, Sean. --- util.lisp 2006-08-03 12:41:22.000000000 +0200 +++ patched-util.lisp 2006-08-03 12:41:30.000000000 +0200 @@ -36,7 +36,8 @@ (in-package #:cl-ppcre) #+:lispworks -(import 'lw:with-unique-names) +(eval-when (:compile-toplevel :load-toplevel :execute) + (import 'lw:with-unique-names)) #-:lispworks (defmacro with-unique-names ((&rest bindings) &body body)

1 1

[cl-ppcre-devel] New version 1.2.16
by Edi Weitz 16 Jul '06

16 Jul '06

ChangeLog: Version 1.2.16 2006-07-16 Added :ELEMENT-TYPE to REGEX-REPLACE(-ALL) Download: http://weitz.de/files/cl-ppcre.tar.gz Cheers, Edi.

1 0

[cl-ppcre-devel] [PATCH] Patches to mix parse trees and regex string.
by Frédéric Jolliton 04 Jul '06

04 Jul '06

Here is 2 patches (attached, if mailman doesn't drop them) for CL-PPCRE for mixing parse trees and regex strings. The first patch add a (?.<name>) syntax, where <name> designate a keyword, and is case sensitive. The ?. was chosen to match the idea of the #. reader macro. It includes the synonym parse tree from the corresponding keyword while the regex is parsed. The second patch add the (:REGEX <regex>) construct to use regex string into parse tree. It's the opposite idea of the former patch. The rationale is that sometimes it's preferable to use regex strings (for compactness), while sometimes it's better to use parse tree (when programmatically computed), but to my knowledge it was impossible to mix them easily. I hope that these patches are not too "hackish". In particular, the reference to a synonym must be a keyword, it's not possible to specify symbols in other packages. Also, since cl-ppcre use symbol property, it's worst to use keywords (unless one take cares to avoid name clashes.) I'm not sure how to fix that. These patches are more to describe what I've in mind rather than providing production quality patches. What do you think about these suggestions ? Examples of use: -=-=- CL> (define-parse-tree-synonym :foo (:sequence #\a (:greedy-repetition 1 3 (:alternation #\b #\c)))) CL> (scan-to-strings "b(ar(?.FOO))a" "baracca") "baracca" #("aracc") -=-=- Mixing the other way: -=-=- CL> (scan-to-strings '(:sequence "b" (:register (:sequence "ar" (:regex "a(?:b|c){1,3}"))) "a") "baracca") "baracca" #("aracc") CL> -=-=- -- Frédéric Jolliton

2 4