From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: (error "Stack overflow in regexp matcher") and (?)wrong display of regexp in backtrace Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2020 17:32:37 +0000 Message-ID: <20200315173237.GE4928@ACM> References: <20200315103922.GA4928@ACM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="58264"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 15 18:35:14 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jDXAQ-000F5C-HP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 18:35:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56386 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jDXAP-0008CD-As for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 13:35:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51759) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jDX7x-0007HO-K9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 13:32:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jDX7w-00017T-Jp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 13:32:41 -0400 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:23355 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jDX7w-00011r-8D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 13:32:40 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 3522 invoked by uid 3782); 15 Mar 2020 17:32:38 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p2E5D5251.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [46.93.82.81]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Sun, 15 Mar 2020 18:32:37 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 11884 invoked by uid 1000); 15 Mar 2020 17:32:37 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: FreeBSD 9.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 193.149.48.1 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:245538 Archived-At: Hello, Stefan. On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 12:35:04 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > First of all, note the regexp, "\\(\\\\\\(.\\|\n\\)\\|[^\\\n\15]\\)*" > > ^^^ > > In the source, the "\15" is "\r". Why is this substitution being made > > for the backtrace? > The string doesn't keep track of whether it was written in the source > code as "\r" or "\^M" or with the actual ^M character or with "\015" > etc... so it's no wonder the printout is not exactly the same as what > you had in the source. I do wonder why it says \15 instead of \015, \r, > or something else: I've almost never seen 2-digit-long octal for chars, > (only single-digit for NUL and 3-digit for other things), so it's > admittedly a poor choice. A very poor choice. What is one to make of an output such as [^\\\n\151]? > Stefan -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).