Excuse me but I have a question. If Gnulib is a collection of utility code
to be used by all projects, why is carrying something Emacs specific? Is
RE_SYNTAX_EMACS used by other projects?

On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 7:58 PM Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:

> On 2025-03-11 10:41, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 14:28:45 +0200
> >> From: Vladimir Gorsunov <gorsunov@gmail.com>
> >>
> >>     Before commit d904cc83 regex syntax flags used in etags were
> >>
> >>     RE_CHAR_CLASSES | RE_INTERVALS | RE_SHY_GROUPS | RE_FRUGAL
> >>
> >>     that got changed to 0. Including a patch that restores
> >>     RE_CHAR_CLASSES and RE_INTERVALS and adds check for these features
> >>     to the test. As far I can understand from the bug 74861, the
> >>     absence of shy groups and non-greedy matching won't be fixed
> >>     until Gnulib supports them
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Paul, any comments?
>
> As I understand it the original design for glibc regex was that Emacs
> was the default, so a flags value of zero meant Emacs. This is why
> RE_SYNTAX_EMACS is 0.
>
> Evidently that design goal no longer holds, so it makes sense to adjust
> Emacs's use of glibc flags to match the behavior of Emacs's only
> regular-expression implementation in emacs/src/regex-emacs.c as best we
> can.
>
> However, surely this adjustment should be made in Gnulib, not in
> etags.c. That is, gnulib/lib/regex.h (aka emacs/lib/regex.h) should
> #define RE_SYNTAX_EMACS to equal RE_CHAR_CLASSES | RE_INTERVALS, not
> zero. And eventually this change should be migrated back to glibc.
>
> I'll cc this to rms in case he has further comments about this.
>


-- 
Mit Respekt, Vladimir Gorsunov