> just looked for unescaped paren groups

Don't forget non-matching groups! Which brings up my point yet again - everyone is pretending this is a dead-simple problem to solve, but all of the proposed solutions are buggy. Not really an option for such a widely-used library.

I'm not claiming it's impossible. I'm claiming it's more difficult than anyone is willing to admit.

Counting capturing groups is a solved problem - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16046620/regex-to-count-t...

Actually, no: if you run this you will see three matching groups, but the first is always the whole match (this is in addition to the capture groups that are defined), the second is the (redundant) capture group you put around the whole thing, and the third is foo/bar/.*. /foo/bar/\d+ is not matched at all, even though it matches the input string.

You are 100% correct, I forgot about that extra group (that doesn't need to be there).

That being said, most frameworks don't have multiple matching routes, and I can't imagine that many people miss them. I've never used a framework that supported that, and I can't say I've ever felt I've missed out. Middleware is the right approach to that problem generally.

The point is to be able to have middleware that only runs on certain urls. For example, you might have middleware that only runs on a particular version of your API (`regexp: ^/1\/.*/`). I've used it fairly extensively.

The point being, now you're describing a completely different, less powerful framework. Which, yes, of course it's faster. You'll notice that's what Netflix ended up doing - they moved to `restify` from `express`.

You might as well just only allow routes to be strings and then you have the constant-time map implementation that the article describes as the expected implementation.