Searched refs:OP_NCLASS (Results 1 – 6 of 6) sorted by relevance
1926 case OP_NCLASS: in find_fixedlength()2554 case OP_NCLASS: in could_be_empty_branch()3060 case OP_NCLASS: in get_chr_property_list()3266 || (!utf && (base_list[0] == OP_NCLASS || list[0] == OP_NCLASS)) in compare_opcodes()3271 if (base_list[0] == OP_CLASS || (!utf && base_list[0] == OP_NCLASS)) in compare_opcodes()3289 case OP_NCLASS: in compare_opcodes()3605 case OP_NCLASS: in compare_opcodes()3726 else if (c == OP_CLASS || c == OP_NCLASS || c == OP_XCLASS) in auto_possessify()5583 *code++ = (negate_class == should_flip_negation) ? OP_CLASS : OP_NCLASS; in compile_branch()5934 else if (*previous == OP_CLASS || *previous == OP_NCLASS || in compile_branch()[all …]
333 case OP_NCLASS: in find_minlength()1326 case OP_NCLASS: in set_start_bits()
323 less than 256, OP_CLASS is used for a positive class, and OP_NCLASS for a329 The reason for having both OP_CLASS and OP_NCLASS is so that, in UTF-8/16/32331 For OP_CLASS they do not match, whereas for OP_NCLASS they do.
629 case OP_NCLASS: in next_opcode()1188 case OP_NCLASS: in set_private_data_ptrs()1407 case OP_NCLASS: in get_framesize()1649 case OP_NCLASS: in get_private_data_copy_length()1862 case OP_NCLASS: in copy_private_data()3365 case OP_NCLASS: in scan_prefix()5776 case OP_NCLASS: in compile_char1_matchingpath()5781 read_char_range(common, 0, bit, type == OP_NCLASS); in compile_char1_matchingpath()7945 case OP_NCLASS: in compile_iterator_matchingpath()8416 case OP_NCLASS: in compile_matchingpath()[all …]
2050 OP_NCLASS, /* 111 Same, but the bitmap was created from a negative enumerator
2875 case OP_NCLASS: in match()
Completed in 62 milliseconds
