Hi! On 4/20/23 01:23, наб wrote: > In the regexec() signature > regmatch_t pmatch[restrict .nmatch], > is a simplification. It's actually > regmatch_t pmatch[restrict > ((.preg->flags & REG_NOSUB) ? 0 : .nmatch) ?: > !!(.eflags & REG_STARTEND)], > > But speccing that would be insane. > > Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <nabijaczleweli@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Patch applied. Thanks! BTW, I capitalized the subject, as is house practice of using proper English sentences for the subject (after the page prefix), with the exception of not using the trailing period (which I know Branden disapproves :p). Cheers, Alex > --- > By the end, I think I get to a regex(3) that I don't dread opening > (and that has all the info I'd want. who knew there was re_nsub?)! > > The main issues here are (a) it's full of standardese, entire paragraphs > lifted from POSIX, or very close to that, and the POSIX dialect is > hostile to human life^W^Wbeing effectively used and (b) what reads like > 30 years of people adding stuff without having read any other part of > the document. Almost everything repeats at least once. > > Funny moments outlined as they come in the messages. > > man3/regex.3 | 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/man3/regex.3 b/man3/regex.3 > index e8fed5147..d77aac2e7 100644 > --- a/man3/regex.3 > +++ b/man3/regex.3 > @@ -80,9 +80,11 @@ The > .I nmatch > and > .I pmatch > -arguments to > .BR regexec () > -are ignored if the pattern buffer supplied was compiled with this flag set. > +arguments will be ignored for this purpose (but > +.I pmatch > +may still be used for > +.BR REG_STARTEND ). > .TP > .B REG_NEWLINE > Match-any-character operators don't match a newline. -- <http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/> GPG key fingerprint: A9348594CE31283A826FBDD8D57633D441E25BB5
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
