Re:Perl Incompatible Regular Expressions
by lylepstein on Saturday September 12, 2015 @10:04PM
(#10210087)
Seems like a riff on the famous Perl Compatible Regular Expressions library (http://www.pcre.org), which is used in a bunch of high-profile things (PHP, and Apache Server, for starters). Kind of like "less" vs "more".
So a bit of an inside joke I guess, but most people familiar with regexes will probably have heard of PCRE, so it's not a terribly obscure reference. I liked it :)
Re:Perl Incompatible Regular Expressions
by a8da6b0c91d on Saturday September 12, 2015 @10:16PM
(#10210117)
PCRE is a set of extensions to RE to enable parsing of nonregular grammars. This is just RE. It's like calling some hypothetical language C++--. It doesn't make sense.
Re:Perl Incompatible Regular Expressions
by kbenson on Saturday September 12, 2015 @11:15PM
(#10210227)
Well, if I designed a language that was C++ but stripped of some specific features for a purpose that made it less than C++, but still not quite just C, I might call it C++-- as a joke. In that respect, I think it makes perfect sense.
Re:Perl Incompatible Regular Expressions
by lincolnq on Saturday September 12, 2015 @10:04PM
(#10210085)
"Perl Compatible Regex" (pcre.org) is a popular regex library. The name PIRE is presumably a reference to that.
Re:Perl Incompatible Regular Expressions
by a8da6b0c91d on Saturday September 12, 2015 @10:14PM
(#10210113)
woosh
Re:Perl Incompatible Regular Expressions
by brudgers on Saturday September 12, 2015 @10:27PM
(#10210139)
There's nothing wrong with it. Its implementation however is optimized for some use cases and not others. It appears that the folks at Yandex did not feel that crawling the web at their scale was one among the tasks for which it was suited.
If you're going to write a stripped down string matching syntax more strictly for "regular" text then why bother mentioning perl?