I am trying to use std::regex in a C++11 piece of code, but it appears that the support is a bit buggy. An example:
#include <regex>
#include <iostream>
int main (int argc, const char * argv[]) {
std::regex r("st|mt|tr");
std::cerr << "st|mt|tr" << " matches st? " << std::regex_match("st", r) << std::endl;
std::cerr << "st|mt|tr" << " matches mt? " << std::regex_match("mt", r) << std::endl;
std::cerr << "st|mt|tr" << " matches tr? " << std::regex_match("tr", r) << std::endl;
}
outputs:
st|mt|tr matches st? 1
st|mt|tr matches mt? 1
st|mt|tr matches tr? 0
when compiled with gcc (MacPorts gcc47 4.7.1_2) 4.7.1, either with
g++ *.cc -o test -std=c++11
g++ *.cc -o test -std=c++0x
or
g++ *.cc -o test -std=gnu++0x
Besides, the regex works well if I only have two alternative patterns, e.g. st|mt
, so it looks like the last one is not matched for some reasons. The code works well with the Apple LLVM compiler.
Any ideas about how to solve the issue?
Update one possible solution is to use groups to implement multiple alternatives, e.g. (st|mt)|tr
.
<regex>
was implemented and released in GCC 4.9.0.In your (older) version of GCC, it is not implemented.
That prototype
<regex>
code was added when all of GCC's C++0x support was highly experimental, tracking early C++0x drafts and being made available for people to experiment with. That allowed people to find problems and give feedback to the standard committee before the standard was finalised. At the time lots of people were grateful to have had access to bleeding edge features long before C++11 was finished and before many other compilers provided any support, and that feedback really helped improve C++11. This was a Good ThingTM.The
<regex>
code was never in a useful state, but was added as a work-in-progress like many other bits of code at the time. It was checked in and made available for others to collaborate on if they wanted to, with the intention that it would be finished eventually.That's often how open source works: Release early, release often -- unfortunately in the case of
<regex>
we only got the early part right and not the often part that would have finished the implementation.Most parts of the library were more complete and are now almost fully implemented, but
<regex>
hadn't been, so it stayed in the same unfinished state since it was added.It wasn't such a bad idea a few years ago, when C++0x was still a work in progress and we shipped lots of partial implementations. No-one thought it would remain unusable for so long so, with hindsight, maybe it should have been disabled and required a macro or built-time option to enable it. But that ship sailed long ago. There are exported symbols from the libstdc++.so library that depend on the regex code, so simply removing it (in, say, GCC 4.8) would not have been trivial.
At this moment (using std=c++14 in g++ (GCC) 4.9.2) is still not accepting regex_match.
Here is an approach that works like regex_match but using sregex_token_iterator instead. And it works with g++.
it will print 1 2 3
you may read the sregex_token_iterator reference in: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/regex/regex_token_iterator
Feature Detection
This is a snippet to detect if the
libstdc++
implementation is implemented with C preprocessor defines:Macros
_GLIBCXX_REGEX_DFS_QUANTIFIERS_LIMIT
is defined inbits/regex.tcc
in4.9.x
_GLIBCXX_REGEX_STATE_LIMIT
is defined inbits/regex_automatron.h
in5+
_GLIBCXX_RELEASE
was added to7+
as a result of this answer and is the GCC major versionTesting
You can test it with GCC like this:
Results
Here are some results for various compilers:
Here be Dragons
This is totally unsupported and relies on the detection of private macros that the GCC developers have put into the
bits/regex*
headers. They could change and go away at anytime. Hopefully, they won't be removed in the current 4.9.x, 5.x, 6.x releases but they could go away in the 7.x releases.If the GCC developers added a
#define _GLIBCXX_HAVE_WORKING_REGEX 1
(or something, hint hint nudge nudge) in the 7.x release that persisted, this snippet could be updated to include that and later GCC releases would work with the snippet above.As far as I know, all other compilers have a working
<regex>
when__cplusplus >= 201103L
but YMMV.Obviously this would completely break if someone defined the
_GLIBCXX_REGEX_DFS_QUANTIFIERS_LIMIT
or_GLIBCXX_REGEX_STATE_LIMIT
macros outside of thestdc++-v3
headers.