Is gcc 4.8 or earlier buggy about regular expressions?

前端 未结 3 1774
一向
一向 2020-11-21 04:29

I am trying to use std::regex in a C++11 piece of code, but it appears that the support is a bit buggy. An example:

#include 
#include 

        
相关标签:
3条回答
  • 2020-11-21 04:58

    <regex> was implemented and released in GCC 4.9.0.

    In your (older) version of GCC, it is not implemented.

    That prototype <regex> code was added when all of GCC's C++0x support was highly experimental, tracking early C++0x drafts and being made available for people to experiment with. That allowed people to find problems and give feedback to the standard committee before the standard was finalised. At the time lots of people were grateful to have had access to bleeding edge features long before C++11 was finished and before many other compilers provided any support, and that feedback really helped improve C++11. This was a Good ThingTM.

    The <regex> code was never in a useful state, but was added as a work-in-progress like many other bits of code at the time. It was checked in and made available for others to collaborate on if they wanted to, with the intention that it would be finished eventually.

    That's often how open source works: Release early, release often -- unfortunately in the case of <regex> we only got the early part right and not the often part that would have finished the implementation.

    Most parts of the library were more complete and are now almost fully implemented, but <regex> hadn't been, so it stayed in the same unfinished state since it was added.

    Seriously though, who though that shipping an implementation of regex_search that only does "return false" was a good idea?

    It wasn't such a bad idea a few years ago, when C++0x was still a work in progress and we shipped lots of partial implementations. No-one thought it would remain unusable for so long so, with hindsight, maybe it should have been disabled and required a macro or built-time option to enable it. But that ship sailed long ago. There are exported symbols from the libstdc++.so library that depend on the regex code, so simply removing it (in, say, GCC 4.8) would not have been trivial.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-11-21 04:59

    At this moment (using std=c++14 in g++ (GCC) 4.9.2) is still not accepting regex_match.

    Here is an approach that works like regex_match but using sregex_token_iterator instead. And it works with g++.

    string line="1a2b3c";
    std::regex re("(\\d)");
    std::vector<std::string> inVector{
        std::sregex_token_iterator(line.begin(), line.end(), re, 1), {}
    };
    
    //prints all matches
    for(int i=0; i<inVector.size(); ++i)
        std::cout << i << ":" << inVector[i] << endl;
    

    it will print 1 2 3

    you may read the sregex_token_iterator reference in: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/regex/regex_token_iterator

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-11-21 05:16

    Feature Detection

    This is a snippet to detect if the libstdc++ implementation is implemented with C preprocessor defines:

    #include <regex>
    #if __cplusplus >= 201103L &&                             \
        (!defined(__GLIBCXX__) || (__cplusplus >= 201402L) || \
            (defined(_GLIBCXX_REGEX_DFS_QUANTIFIERS_LIMIT) || \
             defined(_GLIBCXX_REGEX_STATE_LIMIT)           || \
                 (defined(_GLIBCXX_RELEASE)                && \
                 _GLIBCXX_RELEASE > 4)))
    #define HAVE_WORKING_REGEX 1
    #else
    #define HAVE_WORKING_REGEX 0
    #endif
    

    Macros

    • _GLIBCXX_REGEX_DFS_QUANTIFIERS_LIMIT is defined in bits/regex.tcc in 4.9.x
    • _GLIBCXX_REGEX_STATE_LIMIT is defined in bits/regex_automatron.h in 5+
    • _GLIBCXX_RELEASE was added to 7+ as a result of this answer and is the GCC major version

    Testing

    You can test it with GCC like this:

    cat << EOF | g++ --std=c++11 -x c++ - && ./a.out
    #include <regex>
    
    #if __cplusplus >= 201103L &&                             \
        (!defined(__GLIBCXX__) || (__cplusplus >= 201402L) || \
            (defined(_GLIBCXX_REGEX_DFS_QUANTIFIERS_LIMIT) || \
             defined(_GLIBCXX_REGEX_STATE_LIMIT)           || \
                 (defined(_GLIBCXX_RELEASE)                && \
                 _GLIBCXX_RELEASE > 4)))
    #define HAVE_WORKING_REGEX 1
    #else
    #define HAVE_WORKING_REGEX 0
    #endif
    
    #include <iostream>
    
    int main() {
      const std::regex regex(".*");
      const std::string string = "This should match!";
      const auto result = std::regex_search(string, regex);
    #if HAVE_WORKING_REGEX
      std::cerr << "<regex> works, look: " << std::boolalpha << result << std::endl;
    #else
      std::cerr << "<regex> doesn't work, look: " << std::boolalpha << result << std::endl;
    #endif
      return result ? EXIT_SUCCESS : EXIT_FAILURE;
    }
    EOF
    

    Results

    Here are some results for various compilers:


    $ gcc --version
    gcc (GCC) 4.8.5 20150623 (Red Hat 4.8.5-11)
    Copyright (C) 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
    This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
    warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
    
    $ ./a.out
    <regex> doesn't work, look: false
    

    $ gcc --version
    gcc (GCC) 6.2.1 20160830
    Copyright (C) 2016 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
    This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
    warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
    
    $ ./a.out
    <regex> works, look: true
    

    $ gcc --version
    gcc (Debian 4.9.2-10) 4.9.2
    Copyright (C) 2014 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
    This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
    warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
    
    $ ./a.out
    <regex> works, look: true
    

    $ gcc --version
    gcc (Ubuntu 6.2.0-5ubuntu12) 6.2.0 20161005
    Copyright (C) 2016 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
    This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
    warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
    
    $ ./a.out
    <regex> works, look: true
    

    $ gcc --version
    gcc (Ubuntu 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.4) 5.4.0 20160609
    Copyright (C) 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
    This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
    warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
    
    $ ./a.out
    <regex> works, look: true
    

    $ gcc --version
    gcc (GCC) 6.2.1 20160830
    Copyright (C) 2016 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
    This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
    warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
    
    $ clang --version
    clang version 3.9.0 (tags/RELEASE_390/final)
    Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
    Thread model: posix
    InstalledDir: /usr/bin
    $ ./a.out  # compiled with 'clang -lstdc++'
    <regex> works, look: true
    

    Here be Dragons

    This is totally unsupported and relies on the detection of private macros that the GCC developers have put into the bits/regex* headers. They could change and go away at anytime. Hopefully, they won't be removed in the current 4.9.x, 5.x, 6.x releases but they could go away in the 7.x releases.

    If the GCC developers added a #define _GLIBCXX_HAVE_WORKING_REGEX 1 (or something, hint hint nudge nudge) in the 7.x release that persisted, this snippet could be updated to include that and later GCC releases would work with the snippet above.

    As far as I know, all other compilers have a working <regex> when __cplusplus >= 201103L but YMMV.

    Obviously this would completely break if someone defined the _GLIBCXX_REGEX_DFS_QUANTIFIERS_LIMIT or _GLIBCXX_REGEX_STATE_LIMIT macros outside of the stdc++-v3 headers.

    0 讨论(0)
提交回复
热议问题