Skip to content

Commit ab20842

Browse files
committed
Fix another ancient bug in parsing of BRE-mode regular expressions.
While poking at the regex code, I happened to notice that the bug squashed in commit afcc877 had a sibling: next() failed to return a specific value associated with the '}' token for a "\{m,n\}" quantifier when parsing in basic RE mode. Again, this could result in treating the quantifier as non-greedy, which it never should be in basic mode. For that to happen, the last character before "\}" that sets "nextvalue" would have to set it to zero, or it'd have to have accidentally been zero from the start. The failure can be provoked repeatably with, for example, a bound ending in digit "0". Like the previous patch, back-patch all the way.
1 parent 618d139 commit ab20842

File tree

1 file changed

+1
-1
lines changed

1 file changed

+1
-1
lines changed

src/backend/regex/regc_lex.c

+1-1
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ next(struct vars * v)
389389
{
390390
v->now++;
391391
INTOCON(L_BRE);
392-
RET('}');
392+
RETV('}', 1);
393393
}
394394
else
395395
FAILW(REG_BADBR);

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)