We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Discovered by #322.
The following regex demonstrates the issue:
re> /(a)|\1+/match_unset_backref data> ba 0: a 1: a data> ba\=no_jit 0:
I believe a similar, related case is the following:
re> /(a)|\1+/match_unset_backref data> bbbb No match data> bbbb\=no_jit 0:
What's very curious is that this does not appear without the repetition:
re> /(a)|\1/match_unset_backref data> ba 0: data> ba\=no_jit 0: data> a 0: a 1: a data> a\=no_jit 0: a 1: a
Finally, it appears with fixed repetitions, but not range repetitions:
re> /(a)|\1{128}/match_unset_backref data> ba 0: a 1: a data> ba\=no_jit 0: data> re> /(a)|\1{,128}/match_unset_backref data> ba 0: data> ba\=no_jit 0: data>
This implies to me that there is some issue with how the JIT handles repetitions of empty backreferences.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Fixed in 936fef2
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
Discovered by #322.
The following regex demonstrates the issue:
I believe a similar, related case is the following:
What's very curious is that this does not appear without the repetition:
Finally, it appears with fixed repetitions, but not range repetitions:
This implies to me that there is some issue with how the JIT handles repetitions of empty backreferences.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: