Revision: 1578
http://vcs.pcre.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=1578
Author: ph10
Date: 2015-07-20 17:27:31 +0100 (Mon, 20 Jul 2015)
Log Message:
-----------
Fix bug for classes containing \\ sequences.
Modified Paths:
--------------
code/trunk/ChangeLog
code/trunk/pcre_compile.c
code/trunk/testdata/testinput2
code/trunk/testdata/testoutput2
Modified: code/trunk/ChangeLog
===================================================================
--- code/trunk/ChangeLog 2015-07-20 07:53:12 UTC (rev 1577)
+++ code/trunk/ChangeLog 2015-07-20 16:27:31 UTC (rev 1578)
@@ -84,7 +84,11 @@
21. Fix infinite recursion in the JIT compiler when certain patterns such as
/(?:|a|){100}x/ are analysed.
+22. Some patterns with character classes involving [: and \\ were incorrectly
+ compiled and could cause reading from uninitialized memory or an incorrect
+ error diagnosis.
+
Version 8.37 28-April-2015
--------------------------
Modified: code/trunk/pcre_compile.c
===================================================================
--- code/trunk/pcre_compile.c 2015-07-20 07:53:12 UTC (rev 1577)
+++ code/trunk/pcre_compile.c 2015-07-20 16:27:31 UTC (rev 1578)
@@ -3905,11 +3905,11 @@
The problem in trying to be exactly like Perl is in the handling of escapes. We
have to be sure that [abc[:x\]pqr] is *not* treated as containing a POSIX
class, but [abc[:x\]pqr:]] is (so that an error can be generated). The code
-below handles the special case of \], but does not try to do any other escape
-processing. This makes it different from Perl for cases such as [:l\ower:]
-where Perl recognizes it as the POSIX class "lower" but PCRE does not recognize
-"l\ower". This is a lesser evil than not diagnosing bad classes when Perl does,
-I think.
+below handles the special cases \\ and \], but does not try to do any other
+escape processing. This makes it different from Perl for cases such as
+[:l\ower:] where Perl recognizes it as the POSIX class "lower" but PCRE does
+not recognize "l\ower". This is a lesser evil than not diagnosing bad classes
+when Perl does, I think.
A user pointed out that PCRE was rejecting [:a[:digit:]] whereas Perl was not.
It seems that the appearance of a nested POSIX class supersedes an apparent
@@ -3936,7 +3936,9 @@
terminator = *(++ptr); /* compiler warns about "non-constant" initializer. */
for (++ptr; *ptr != CHAR_NULL; ptr++)
{
- if (*ptr == CHAR_BACKSLASH && ptr[1] == CHAR_RIGHT_SQUARE_BRACKET)
+ if (*ptr == CHAR_BACKSLASH &&
+ (ptr[1] == CHAR_RIGHT_SQUARE_BRACKET ||
+ ptr[1] == CHAR_BACKSLASH))
ptr++;
else if (*ptr == CHAR_RIGHT_SQUARE_BRACKET) return FALSE;
else
Modified: code/trunk/testdata/testinput2
===================================================================
--- code/trunk/testdata/testinput2 2015-07-20 07:53:12 UTC (rev 1577)
+++ code/trunk/testdata/testinput2 2015-07-20 16:27:31 UTC (rev 1578)
@@ -4184,4 +4184,6 @@
/(?(R))*+/BZ
+/[[:\\](?'abc')[a:]/
+
/-- End of testinput2 --/
Modified: code/trunk/testdata/testoutput2
===================================================================
--- code/trunk/testdata/testoutput2 2015-07-20 07:53:12 UTC (rev 1577)
+++ code/trunk/testdata/testoutput2 2015-07-20 16:27:31 UTC (rev 1578)
@@ -14502,4 +14502,6 @@
End
------------------------------------------------------------------
+/[[:\\](?'abc')[a:]/
+
/-- End of testinput2 --/
