[Arnt Gulbrandsen]:
Kjetil Torgrim Homme writes:
> [Tim Showalter]:
>> If I had done minimal-matching right-to-left, would the result
>> have been greedy? (This would resolve my objection.)
>
> yes.
No. Consider the match for a*a in ababa: A minimal match takes aba
no matter whether it's right-to-left or left-to-right, a greedy
one takes ababa.
doh! I assumed anchored matching, sorry!
We're discussing sieve here, and sieve uses anchored matches for :matches.
While RFC 3028 doesn't have an explicit statement to the effect that :matches
is anchored, the only discussion of substring matches is specifically in the
context of :contains, and there are a couple of examples of the the form
if header :matches "subject" "*make*money*fast*" ...
that don't make much sense if :matches is unanchored.
I also note that turning an anchored match into an unanchored match is
easy. (The opposite is not true -- another reason why sieve matches need to be
anchored.)
We probably want to add an explicit statement when RFC 3028 is revised.
Ned