Re: variables: greedy or non-greedy matching

[ned.freed@xxxxxxxxxxx]

> [Ned Freed]:
> >
> >   [Jutta Degener]:
> >   > So let's stay greedy; thanks for setting me straight!
> >
> >   No problem ;-) And let's also remember that a necessary corollary
> >   here is that the regexp we end up choosing needs to support both
> >   greedy and non-greedy matching.

> why?  I thought we only needed that if :matches was non-greedy.

> I wouldn't mind having non-greedy regexps, but they're not in POSIX.2
> which the regex draft refers to.

Jutta's argument, which I believe is valid, is that expectations can only
be met by having both types available. As for the reference to POSIX, I thought
that had already been determined to be unsufficient and there was a suggestion
to replace it with something else (ECMAScript maybe?).

				Ned