Re: string-match bug?

[Andreas Röhler]

Matthew Dempsky wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> If
>> (string-match (concat regex1 regex2) (concat str1 str2))
>> then
>> (and (string-match regex1 str1) (string-match regex2 str2))
> 
> Not quite: STRING-MATCH searches for a substring that matches a
> specified regexp; it doesn't return whether the whole string matches
> the regexp.
> 
> 
> 

As said, present behavior is POSIX and I don't question that for now.
Nonetheless, returning NIL at the second question looks like a more useful 
result -
because taking incertitude.

(string-match "a" "a") => 0
(string-match "" "a") => 0
(string-match "" "") => 0