Bug 7253

Summary: Inline regex produces wrong results vs. creating new RegExp object
Product: WebKit Reporter: Parag Shah <pshah>
Component: JavaScriptCoreAssignee: Nobody <webkit-unassigned>
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE    
Severity: Normal CC: ap, ddkilzer, ian, markmalone
Priority: P2 Keywords: HasReduction, InRadar
Version: 417.x   
Hardware: Mac   
OS: OS X 10.4   
Attachments:
Description Flags
Narrowed down testcase none

Parag Shah
Reported 2006-02-14 11:36:04 PST
Basically creating a regex like this: var regex = /^([^#<\u2264]+)([#<\u2264])(.*)$/; does not give any results vs. creating a regex like this: var regex = new RegExp("^([^#<\u2264]+)([#<\u2264])(.*)$"); This probably isnt a bug in most cases but see attachment for narrowed down testcase where this is happening - comment out line 10 and uncomment line 9 (and vice versa) to see the bug. FF/IE work fine in both cases. Tested on Safari v2.0.3 (417.8) on OS X v10.4.4
Attachments
Narrowed down testcase (504 bytes, text/html)
2006-02-14 11:36 PST, Parag Shah 		no flags
Details
View All Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Parag Shah
Comment 1 2006-02-14 11:36:37 PST
Created attachment 6484 [details] Narrowed down testcase
Alexey Proskuryakov
Comment 2 2006-02-14 12:28:52 PST
Confirmed with ToT
Alexey Proskuryakov
Comment 3 2006-02-14 12:37:17 PST
Console log says: KJS: pcre_compile() failed with 'PCRE does not support \L, \l, \N, \U, or \u'
Geoffrey Garen
Comment 4 2006-02-14 17:34:06 PST
Maks posted a patch about this. Can't seem to find it right now.
Alexey Proskuryakov
Comment 5 2006-02-14 21:26:47 PST
Probably bug 6257 - not sure if this should be marked as a duplicate.
Alexey Proskuryakov
Comment 6 2006-08-28 21:50:09 PDT
*** Bug 10611 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
David Kilzer (:ddkilzer)
Comment 7 2006-08-29 04:53:51 PDT
Per Bug 10611 Comment #2, this bug is in Radar as: rdar://4694011 Bug 10611 also has its own reduced test case.
W. Andy Carrel
Comment 8 2006-10-27 08:40:13 PDT
The patch landed for bug 7445 (r17354) makes the reduction for this bug function properly. This should be marked as a duplicate.
David Kilzer (:ddkilzer)
Comment 9 2006-10-27 09:40:28 PDT
(In reply to comment #8) > The patch landed for bug 7445 (r17354) makes the reduction for this bug > function properly. This should be marked as a duplicate. It would probably be best to land the reduction (Attachment 6484 [details]) as a test before closing this bug.
David Kilzer (:ddkilzer)
Comment 10 2006-10-27 09:41:47 PDT
(In reply to comment #9) > It would probably be best to land the reduction (Attachment 6484 [details]) as a test > before closing this bug. Especially since the fix for Bug 7445 didn't include a layout test.
David Kilzer (:ddkilzer)
Comment 11 2006-10-27 09:49:33 PDT
(In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > It would probably be best to land the reduction (Attachment 6484 [details] [edit]) as a test > > before closing this bug. > > Especially since the fix for Bug 7445 didn't include a layout test. Test cases will be forthcoming for Bug 7445 per Bug 7445 Comment #18, so closing this as a duplicate per Comment #8. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 7445 ***
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.