GNU bug report logs - #66363
gdb-control-commands-regexp issues

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>

Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 15:08:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Done: Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 66363 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#66363: gdb-control-commands-regexp issues
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 20:11:24 +0200

5 okt. 2023 kl. 19.43 skrev Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>:

> So the problem is only that 3 should be changed to the correct group
> number?

That would perhaps work, but it wouldn't be a very robust solution. There are many groups preceding that we don't care about, and the bug arose precisely because they were added without considering that a group was being used.

Better then to get rid of all groups save the one in use. (The proposed patch does that.)
That would make it much more difficult for the same bug to arise again.

> Here you are talking about some optimization of the regexp, or is it
> another bug?  If the latter, what is the bug here?

It's related. When the reference to subgroup 3 was added (30c0f81f9f), the tail looked like this:

  "\\([[:blank:]]+\\([^[:blank:]]*\\)\\)?$"
                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
and subgroup 3 was the second group in this substring (underlined above). Later (f71afd600a) the last `?` was changed into a `*`, but that made the contents of that group somewhat hazy because of the repetition:

  "\\([[:blank:]]+\\([^[:blank:]]*\\)\\)*$"
                                        ^
which doesn't leave us with a useful group for the purpose of detecting command arguments at all.
So the tail of the regexp has to be rewritten anyway, and we might as well do it in a more straightforward way. (The proposed patch does that as well.)

The reason I found this is that it contains a sub-pattern on the form (A+B*)* which is super-linear in general but usually easy to fix so that the result is actually more readable, yet faster.
This bug report was last modified 1 year and 263 days ago.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.