Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 15:35:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Jamie Howard <howardjp@wam.umd.edu> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, tech-userlevel@netbsd.org, tech@openbsd.org Subject: Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.9907071528400.9934-100000@rac10.wam.umd.edu> In-Reply-To: <xzp7locthir.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7 Jul 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > BTW, I assume you've read this: > > <URL:http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xcu/grep.html>; Of course, my copy of the printout is all marked up. :) > I see you switched to using extended regexps by default, and made -E a > no-op; this breaks the ports collection, so I changed it back. The FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD manpage for grep says this: Grep understands two different versions of regular expression syntax: ``basic'' and ``extended.'' In GNU grep, there is no difference in available functionality using either syntax. Is this inaccurate or am I reading it wrong? > Sort your switch cases. > Don't use err() indiscriminately after a malloc() failure; malloc() > doesn't set errno. Shouldn't malloc be fixed? :) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.9907071528400.9934-100000>