vim-ripgrep VS RE2

But I mostly use ctrlp when I work with projects. A can recommend vim-ripgrep too, it lets you find strings/patterns in your project files.

I use vim-ripgrep and the result is directly addressed into the quickfix.

Sometimes I still use https://github.com/jremmen/vim-ripgrep to ripgrep non-interactively with more complex searches over bigger projects, which populates the quickfix list, the rely on bqf for extra functionality

which is what I was looking for in this regard, it allows you to specify rg arguments, like -tlua to only search in lua files for example. For me this was something that was missing, I was using https://github.com/jremmen/vim-ripgrep before that, which I still use as it is muscle memory.

In emacs we can do incremental search through an entire directory with projectile-ripgrep. The only thing I know that works more or less the same in vim is https://github.com/jremmen/vim-ripgrep, but the results only appear after I enter the hole expression and press enter, and not incrementally. Also, projectile-ripgrep lets me use a regex instead of just normal text as a query.

project-wide search (I use vim-ripgrep but any grep-finder would do)

I'm running the kitty terminal emulator with fzf and https://github.com/jremmen/vim-ripgrep installed and integrated w/ VIM-Vi IMproved 8.2 (or I believe I do). Please refer to this github link to see my vimrc.

I’m no expert, but I believe ripgrep will do PCRE, and there are more than a couple vim plugins that’ll leverage it. I happen to use vim-ripgrep, which is good enough for me, but not sure if it’ll let you get at the PCRE option (I’d guess it should, but I haven’t checked).

If the symbol has a fairly unique name you can do something like 'grep word under cursor', there are many ways to do this, I tend to use https://github.com/jremmen/vim-ripgrep, also just :h vimgrep. For more complicated cases maybe write some minimal vimscript/lua code to for example use a more specialized grep pattern in a specific directory and make a keymap for that or something.

My question is simple: Why do we need plugin like: (jremmen/vim-ripgrep)[https://github.com/jremmen/vim-ripgrep]

Looking at the benchmark where C++ is worst compared to other languages, it's depending on the library used. I would guess if they used Google's re2 Regex library instead of Boost's, the result would be different.

https://github.com/google/re2

https://github.com/greensoftwarelab/Energy-Languages/blob/ma...

That page says it just includes "some of the most common special characters", and following the link to the Examples page in turn includes a link to the full list.

Python uses backtracking, so this probably isn't O(n), especially with the ability to choose the dictionary.

But with there are non-backtracking matchers which would make this O(n). Here's re2 from https://github.com/google/re2 :

  >>> import re2

RE2 is a Google regular expression library

google's regex library: https://github.com/google/re2

I am currently working with Regex, specifically Re2, and was wondering if there is a real difference between the above expressions for repeated sub-regex.

I ported Google RE2, a regular expression library, to SPVM as Resource::Re2, and created SPVM::Regex, a wrapper for it.

I searched for I found that there is a Perl compatible regular expression called Google RE2. It is written in C++, and with Google RE2, I can use Perl-compatible regular expressions as a library.

Yes, but there is an interesting clarification here. RE2 has used the "caching" approach documented in the Ruby bug ticket linked for quite some time (since its birth?): https://github.com/google/re2/blob/954656f47fe8fb505d4818da1...

It is mentioned only briefly in Cox's article on regex matching in the wild. Look for the word "bitstate": https://swtch.com/~rsc/regexp/regexp3.html

I didn't know Perl had implemented this trick too.

The paper[1] cited in the Ruby bug ticket was published very recently. When I first read the Ruby bug ticket, I immediately wondered how they sidestepped the memory use problem. The paper's abstract seems to suggest there is some technique for doing so, as it rebuffs the idea of doing "full" memoization. Alas, I do not have access the paper. (Which is fucking ridiculous.)

[1]: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9519427