Aren't the options you want just the same as the POSIX-Basic syntax
Yes, but because they could previously be individually selected, I gave the users of my application the option of setting bk_parens and/or bk_braces, separately from choosing POSIX or Perl semantics. It seems that syntax and semantics are no longer orthogonal. I don't have strong feelings about that, but just wanted to check that it was intentional, before hacking the application. Thanks, Keith MacDonald "John Maddock" <john@johnmaddock.co.uk> wrote in message news:00cf01c62ef3$4d9bbae0$47520e52@fuji...
It states in history.html for regex 1.33.0 that "some of the more esoteric options have now been removed, so there is the possibility that existing code may fail to compile: however equivalent functionality should still be available". I suppose bk_parens and bk_braces could be considered esoteric, but I cannot find any equivalent functionality. Is that intentional?
Apologies for the slow response I missed the first one.
Aren't the options you want just the same as the POSIX-Basic syntax:
boost::regex e("\\(abc\\)\\{1,2\\}", boost::regex::basic);
See file:///c:/data/boost/develop/boost/libs/regex/doc/syntax_basic.html
For the full syntax and the variations on it (like emacs style regexes).
John.