Re^2: Is there a hard limit on + in a regex?

No, both the XML::Validator::Schema failure and the command-line success are happening with the same Perl, a custom-built copy of 5.6.1 on i686-linux.

-sam

Comment on Re^2: Is there a hard limit on + in a regex?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Is there a hard limit on + in a regex? by tinita (Parson) on Jul 09, 2004 at 18:53 UTC
are you really sure that is the exact regex? by making the regex just one little bit more complex i can get the error i stated above. e.g. `(?:<object+>)+` instead of `(?:<object>)+`	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Is there a hard limit on + in a regex? by samtregar (Abbot) on Jul 09, 2004 at 18:57 UTC
Yes, I'm reasonably sure. The only difference is that in XML::Validator::Schema the regex is built into a string and then compiled with qr//. But even that works from the command line: `$ perl -e '$s = join("", (("<object>") x 160_000)); $re = qr/^(?:<o +bject>)+$/; print "ok\n" if $s =~ /$re/;' ok` [download] -sam	[reply] [d/l]
Re^5: Is there a hard limit on + in a regex? by diotalevi (Canon) on Jul 09, 2004 at 19:40 UTC
Why don't you show us the regexp and perhaps the regexp as dumped by `perl -Mre=debug`? That's what will really tell you what is going on.	[reply] [d/l]