Open sdheh opened 2 weeks ago
Now that I review this issue, I do tend to agree that this is an issue if the method is being used without following on with the template matcher.
@sdheh - It looks like you have a pretty good handle on approaches to fix this. Can you create a pull request?
Version 1.1.11 Example 1 greedy regex after optional:
Returns
but the start index should be 3.
Example 2 greedy regex at start:
Returns
but the start index should be 2.
.?{0,5000}
doesn't seem to work as expected. It is an unusual regex that some online regex websites say is invalid: https://regex101.com/r/l3810b/1, regexr.com/81kfo. https://www.freeformatter.com/java-regex-tester.html says the regular expression is valid.I think maybe to fix this you could just offer a method for a regex to find the beginning of the non-optional part. Otherwise a changing the regular expressions in these two cases to something like the following could work
In the first case if there were multiple optional parts it would get even more complicated to do it correctly.