Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I was in the middle of writing some regex-automata code (using the early 0.2.0 release) when this post dropped. Welp, time to see if I'm going to have to start all over digging into some brand new internals~

(I haven't read the post yet because I have an important call in a few minutes, but it looks like a very interesting and also conveniently-timed blog post.)

(Edit a few minutes later: looks like the answer might be yes, but since this is a polished release, I might be able to simplify my code massively. Wish me luck~)

(Edit 2 about 10 minutes later: well that was pretty painless and the new Builder::patch method is a total upgrade. Awesome~)

P.S. I'm still blocked from all your GitHub repositories and I think that's kind of unfair considering how widespread a lot of your crates are. I don't remember the original incident anymore. I believe the regex crate itself is under the rust-lang organization now, but there are still others I can't interact with.



The regex-automata 0.2.0 docs did have a giant warning about this, and strongly recommended going with 0.1: https://docs.rs/regex-automata/0.2.0/regex_automata/

> I'm still blocked from all your GitHub repositories and I think that's kind of unfair considering how widespread a lot of your crates are. I don't remember the original incident anymore.

I don't either. I block a lot of people for a lot of reasons. I unblocked you.


> The regex-automata 0.2.0 docs did have a giant warning about this

I didn't listen, and it paid off, because a bunch of the knowledge I learned on it is still perfectly applicable to 0.3.0; I already have the same NFA as before. :)

Now my appointment got canceled so I get to read your blog post and play with the new version. Fun!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: