HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
google
redgrep
C++2015–2026
google / redgrep · Archived

redgrep

♥ Janusz Brzozowski

7Distinct people
12Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
165GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

♥ Janusz Brzozowski

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 12:45:45 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year12 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2015-10-21 01:44:39 UTC to 2026-03-24 11:17:04 UTC.

0123452015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments20152016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20202021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 5 mentions; 1 submissions, 4 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC514
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

1 sources
RE2 was used in Google Code Search in an adversarial context, and it handles the DFA issue by simply putting an 8MB limit on the DFA for a regex: https://github.com/google/re2/blob/master/re2/re2.h#L601 I learned a few months ago that Rust's regex crate, which is based heavily on RE2, does the same thing. There is perhaps something worth exploring there, but after reading the Cox articles, I can see that there are so many issues that come up in regex implementation, and this seems to be one of the smaller ones. I don't think the "regex as untrusted data" use case is very common. That is, there are probably 10,000 programs that use regexes for every one that accepts regexes from users. ----- Although, one thing I've wanted to explore is Regex derivatives. Supposedly that technique constructs an optimal DFA directly. You don't have to ma
Read the rest
ke an NFA, convert it to a DFA, and then optimize the DFA. Cox describes it as a "win-win" here (in contrast to parsing with derivatives, which is asymptotically worse than traditional parsing algorithms) https://research.swtch.com/yaccalive There a bunch of non-production implementations floating around like https://github.com/google/redgrep https://github.com/MichaelPaddon/epsilon (This technique was revived by the 2009 paper cited) ----- Regarding the blog post, I have some material here. I gave about 10% of this as a 5-minute talk, and realized it's about 2 hours worth of material. https://www.oilshell.org/share/05-31-pres.html I still think the table toward the end is a good summary and perhaps worth publishing with some more context / explanation. ---- One interesting test of whether the message from Cox's articles got through is what style of regex engine newer languages are using. I just noticed Julia uses PCRE, which is unfortunate IMO. I like RE2 -- it has a nice API, great performance, and a lot of features. https://docs.julialang.org/en/v1/manual/strings/index.html#R... Swift also has Perl-style regexes, but maybe they inherited it from Objective C: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/foundation/nsregul... So basically Rust is the only newer language that appears to have gotten the message. The Oil shell will of course use "regular languages" rather than regexes, but that's natural because shell never had Perl-style regexes. One thing I think Cox didn't explore enough is that most libc's appear to be using the "fast" good method, because they don't need Perl constructs. I guess that would be a good follow-up article. To test GNU libc and musl libc on those pathological cases. I looked at their code a few years ago and they looked "right" (I've forgotten the details), but I don't think I ever did the test.
In Regular Expression Matching Can Be Simple and Fast (2007)

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.