Subject: bug#9681: Broken behaviour of re-search-backward (.+ matching only a single character)

From: Stefan Monnier <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 08:57:09 -0400

> If this curious inconsistency of `re-search-backward' with
> `re-search-forward' is intentional (which I hope it is not), it should
> be documented, but I couldn't find anything in the manuals or
> docstrings.

re-search-* stops at the first character position that has a match.
And then it chooses the longest match at that position.

        Stefan