123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220 |
- .TH PCRE2MATCHING 3 "23 May 2019" "PCRE2 10.34"
- .SH NAME
- PCRE2 - Perl-compatible regular expressions (revised API)
- .SH "PCRE2 MATCHING ALGORITHMS"
- .rs
- .sp
- This document describes the two different algorithms that are available in
- PCRE2 for matching a compiled regular expression against a given subject
- string. The "standard" algorithm is the one provided by the \fBpcre2_match()\fP
- function. This works in the same as as Perl's matching function, and provide a
- Perl-compatible matching operation. The just-in-time (JIT) optimization that is
- described in the
- .\" HREF
- \fBpcre2jit\fP
- .\"
- documentation is compatible with this function.
- .P
- An alternative algorithm is provided by the \fBpcre2_dfa_match()\fP function;
- it operates in a different way, and is not Perl-compatible. This alternative
- has advantages and disadvantages compared with the standard algorithm, and
- these are described below.
- .P
- When there is only one possible way in which a given subject string can match a
- pattern, the two algorithms give the same answer. A difference arises, however,
- when there are multiple possibilities. For example, if the pattern
- .sp
- ^<.*>
- .sp
- is matched against the string
- .sp
- <something> <something else> <something further>
- .sp
- there are three possible answers. The standard algorithm finds only one of
- them, whereas the alternative algorithm finds all three.
- .
- .
- .SH "REGULAR EXPRESSIONS AS TREES"
- .rs
- .sp
- The set of strings that are matched by a regular expression can be represented
- as a tree structure. An unlimited repetition in the pattern makes the tree of
- infinite size, but it is still a tree. Matching the pattern to a given subject
- string (from a given starting point) can be thought of as a search of the tree.
- There are two ways to search a tree: depth-first and breadth-first, and these
- correspond to the two matching algorithms provided by PCRE2.
- .
- .
- .SH "THE STANDARD MATCHING ALGORITHM"
- .rs
- .sp
- In the terminology of Jeffrey Friedl's book "Mastering Regular Expressions",
- the standard algorithm is an "NFA algorithm". It conducts a depth-first search
- of the pattern tree. That is, it proceeds along a single path through the tree,
- checking that the subject matches what is required. When there is a mismatch,
- the algorithm tries any alternatives at the current point, and if they all
- fail, it backs up to the previous branch point in the tree, and tries the next
- alternative branch at that level. This often involves backing up (moving to the
- left) in the subject string as well. The order in which repetition branches are
- tried is controlled by the greedy or ungreedy nature of the quantifier.
- .P
- If a leaf node is reached, a matching string has been found, and at that point
- the algorithm stops. Thus, if there is more than one possible match, this
- algorithm returns the first one that it finds. Whether this is the shortest,
- the longest, or some intermediate length depends on the way the greedy and
- ungreedy repetition quantifiers are specified in the pattern.
- .P
- Because it ends up with a single path through the tree, it is relatively
- straightforward for this algorithm to keep track of the substrings that are
- matched by portions of the pattern in parentheses. This provides support for
- capturing parentheses and backreferences.
- .
- .
- .SH "THE ALTERNATIVE MATCHING ALGORITHM"
- .rs
- .sp
- This algorithm conducts a breadth-first search of the tree. Starting from the
- first matching point in the subject, it scans the subject string from left to
- right, once, character by character, and as it does this, it remembers all the
- paths through the tree that represent valid matches. In Friedl's terminology,
- this is a kind of "DFA algorithm", though it is not implemented as a
- traditional finite state machine (it keeps multiple states active
- simultaneously).
- .P
- Although the general principle of this matching algorithm is that it scans the
- subject string only once, without backtracking, there is one exception: when a
- lookaround assertion is encountered, the characters following or preceding the
- current point have to be independently inspected.
- .P
- The scan continues until either the end of the subject is reached, or there are
- no more unterminated paths. At this point, terminated paths represent the
- different matching possibilities (if there are none, the match has failed).
- Thus, if there is more than one possible match, this algorithm finds all of
- them, and in particular, it finds the longest. The matches are returned in
- decreasing order of length. There is an option to stop the algorithm after the
- first match (which is necessarily the shortest) is found.
- .P
- Note that all the matches that are found start at the same point in the
- subject. If the pattern
- .sp
- cat(er(pillar)?)?
- .sp
- is matched against the string "the caterpillar catchment", the result is the
- three strings "caterpillar", "cater", and "cat" that start at the fifth
- character of the subject. The algorithm does not automatically move on to find
- matches that start at later positions.
- .P
- PCRE2's "auto-possessification" optimization usually applies to character
- repeats at the end of a pattern (as well as internally). For example, the
- pattern "a\ed+" is compiled as if it were "a\ed++" because there is no point
- even considering the possibility of backtracking into the repeated digits. For
- DFA matching, this means that only one possible match is found. If you really
- do want multiple matches in such cases, either use an ungreedy repeat
- ("a\ed+?") or set the PCRE2_NO_AUTO_POSSESS option when compiling.
- .P
- There are a number of features of PCRE2 regular expressions that are not
- supported or behave differently in the alternative matching function. Those
- that are not supported cause an error if encountered.
- .P
- 1. Because the algorithm finds all possible matches, the greedy or ungreedy
- nature of repetition quantifiers is not relevant (though it may affect
- auto-possessification, as just described). During matching, greedy and ungreedy
- quantifiers are treated in exactly the same way. However, possessive
- quantifiers can make a difference when what follows could also match what is
- quantified, for example in a pattern like this:
- .sp
- ^a++\ew!
- .sp
- This pattern matches "aaab!" but not "aaa!", which would be matched by a
- non-possessive quantifier. Similarly, if an atomic group is present, it is
- matched as if it were a standalone pattern at the current point, and the
- longest match is then "locked in" for the rest of the overall pattern.
- .P
- 2. When dealing with multiple paths through the tree simultaneously, it is not
- straightforward to keep track of captured substrings for the different matching
- possibilities, and PCRE2's implementation of this algorithm does not attempt to
- do this. This means that no captured substrings are available.
- .P
- 3. Because no substrings are captured, backreferences within the pattern are
- not supported.
- .P
- 4. For the same reason, conditional expressions that use a backreference as the
- condition or test for a specific group recursion are not supported.
- .P
- 5. Again for the same reason, script runs are not supported.
- .P
- 6. Because many paths through the tree may be active, the \eK escape sequence,
- which resets the start of the match when encountered (but may be on some paths
- and not on others), is not supported.
- .P
- 7. Callouts are supported, but the value of the \fIcapture_top\fP field is
- always 1, and the value of the \fIcapture_last\fP field is always 0.
- .P
- 8. The \eC escape sequence, which (in the standard algorithm) always matches a
- single code unit, even in a UTF mode, is not supported in these modes, because
- the alternative algorithm moves through the subject string one character (not
- code unit) at a time, for all active paths through the tree.
- .P
- 9. Except for (*FAIL), the backtracking control verbs such as (*PRUNE) are not
- supported. (*FAIL) is supported, and behaves like a failing negative assertion.
- .P
- 10. The PCRE2_MATCH_INVALID_UTF option for \fBpcre2_compile()\fP is not
- supported by \fBpcre2_dfa_match()\fP.
- .
- .
- .SH "ADVANTAGES OF THE ALTERNATIVE ALGORITHM"
- .rs
- .sp
- Using the alternative matching algorithm provides the following advantages:
- .P
- 1. All possible matches (at a single point in the subject) are automatically
- found, and in particular, the longest match is found. To find more than one
- match using the standard algorithm, you have to do kludgy things with
- callouts.
- .P
- 2. Because the alternative algorithm scans the subject string just once, and
- never needs to backtrack (except for lookbehinds), it is possible to pass very
- long subject strings to the matching function in several pieces, checking for
- partial matching each time. Although it is also possible to do multi-segment
- matching using the standard algorithm, by retaining partially matched
- substrings, it is more complicated. The
- .\" HREF
- \fBpcre2partial\fP
- .\"
- documentation gives details of partial matching and discusses multi-segment
- matching.
- .
- .
- .SH "DISADVANTAGES OF THE ALTERNATIVE ALGORITHM"
- .rs
- .sp
- The alternative algorithm suffers from a number of disadvantages:
- .P
- 1. It is substantially slower than the standard algorithm. This is partly
- because it has to search for all possible matches, but is also because it is
- less susceptible to optimization.
- .P
- 2. Capturing parentheses, backreferences, script runs, and matching within
- invalid UTF string are not supported.
- .P
- 3. Although atomic groups are supported, their use does not provide the
- performance advantage that it does for the standard algorithm.
- .
- .
- .SH AUTHOR
- .rs
- .sp
- .nf
- Philip Hazel
- University Computing Service
- Cambridge, England.
- .fi
- .
- .
- .SH REVISION
- .rs
- .sp
- .nf
- Last updated: 23 May 2019
- Copyright (c) 1997-2019 University of Cambridge.
- .fi
|