Re^2: differnce between egrep and perl regex ?

Of course you are right about it being an anything but CPU match, I saw CPU in there and assumed it was looking in a very odd way for CPU rather than an egrep efficient match on (?!CPU).

I guess my problem will be innocent litteral characters in the egrep regex that are not special there but that perl interprets as special, such as the {M,N}? where the ? is special in perl and \d, \w etc which egrep knows nothing about. I could just hope the odds are low.

It looks like a non-trivial problem to be sure there is nothing perl regexp-ish that is not egrep regex, anyone know if there is a conversion module/tool already written, I only need do the conversion once everytime the patterns are updated (less than annual event)

Cheers,
R.

Comment on Re^2: differnce between egrep and perl regex ? Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: differnce between egrep and perl regex ? by ysth (Canon) on Oct 12, 2004 at 13:55 UTC
You might just scan your regexes for `/\\[a-z]/`, but I really don't think in practice you will find anything that actually needs conversion. Update: Reading more closely, I see a few areas of minor concern for character classes; perl doesn't support collating symbols (e.g. `[[.fu.]]`) or equivalence class expressions (e.g. `[[=à=]]`), and perl treats backslash in a character class as an escaping character but egrep should treat it as a literal backslash.	[reply] [d/l] [select]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^3: differnce between egrep and perl regex ?
by ysth (Canon) on Oct 12, 2004 at 13:55 UTC

/\\[a-z]/

Update: Reading more closely, I see a few areas of minor concern for character classes; perl doesn't support collating symbols (e.g. [[.fu.]]) or equivalence class expressions (e.g. [[=à=]]), and perl treats backslash in a character class as an escaping character but egrep should treat it as a literal backslash.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]