On 02/07/2012 22:24, Dan Shelton wrote:
> The +? after the pattern makes sure the previous expression is not
> greedy. regex(5) should explain. So it won't swallow the whole
> document, it'll travel along the characters until it finds the first
> -->
There is no ? after the + in the code you quoted.
(<!--.+-->)+?| # xml comments
^
the outer group has a +? but that doesn't help and as I said originally
the regexp would be wrong even if it had <!--.+?--> as it doesn't
enforce the restriction that comments may contain - but not --.
David
--
google plus: https:/profiles.google.com/d.p.carlisle
