You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
sylvinus opened this issue
Apr 10, 2019
· 2 comments
Labels
NeedsFixThe path to resolution is known, but the work has not been done.TestingAn issue that has been verified to require only test changes, not just a test failure.
There are some areas of the regexp module that are not covered by the tests, as extensive as they already are.
Mostly, they include some prefix stuff (that may have caused #30511 & #30425), some utf8 code paths, some case folding, some paths in onepass and the RuneReader input interface.
Does the idea of trying to run all test regexps through all 3 matchers (onepass when possible, backtrack, nfa) and all 3 input types (string, bytes, reader) sound good? We should aim for each of them being individually correct, and this would help adding new ones in the future (dfa!).
I'm starting work on a CL. I want to throw in some of the fuzzing I did before in #21463, should I add it here or open a separate issue/CL?
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
NeedsFixThe path to resolution is known, but the work has not been done.TestingAn issue that has been verified to require only test changes, not just a test failure.
There are some areas of the regexp module that are not covered by the tests, as extensive as they already are.
Mostly, they include some prefix stuff (that may have caused #30511 & #30425), some utf8 code paths, some case folding, some paths in onepass and the RuneReader input interface.
Does the idea of trying to run all test regexps through all 3 matchers (onepass when possible, backtrack, nfa) and all 3 input types (string, bytes, reader) sound good? We should aim for each of them being individually correct, and this would help adding new ones in the future (dfa!).
I'm starting work on a CL. I want to throw in some of the fuzzing I did before in #21463, should I add it here or open a separate issue/CL?
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: