Misleading documentation about regular expression matcher

[radekg1000]

The documentation for CookBook.md contains the following phrase:

EXPECT_THAT(Bar(), MatchesRegex("Line \\d+"));

This phrase is misleading on linux because \d metacharacter (for digit) is not supported on linux (just tested on my latest Mint linux). The same applies to advanced.md file which also mentions \d+ a few times.

Consider adding a unit test that would verify if they are really supported or change the documentation to match reality.

Additional comment: I lost a few hours today chasing up why the matcher does not work. Even if it does not work when using the correct syntax I find this library very, very use full. Thank you for any ones effort in its creation.

[radekg1000]

These files (in C++) contain native linux programs to verify simple regular expression.
regme_with_digit.txt
regme_without_digit.txt

[radekg1000]

Run this as a proof:

TEST(Matcher, general)
{
    EXPECT_THAT("1", MatchesRegex("\\d"));  // <- this line is failing
    EXPECT_THAT("1", MatchesRegex("[0-9]"));
}

Result:

00:37:12: Debugging starts
Note: Google Test filter = Matcher*
[==========] Running 1 test from 1 test case.
[----------] Global test environment set-up.
[----------] 1 test from Matcher
[ RUN      ] Matcher.general
/home/radek/Projects/super-hat/test/src/model/streaminglivedata/streaminglivedataformatter_test.cpp:76: Failure
Value of: "1"
Expected: matches regular expression "\\d"
  Actual: "1" (of type char [2])
[  FAILED  ] Matcher.general (0 ms)
[----------] 1 test from Matcher (0 ms total)

[----------] Global test environment tear-down
[==========] 1 test from 1 test case ran. (0 ms total)
[  PASSED  ] 0 tests.
[  FAILED  ] 1 test, listed below:
[  FAILED  ] Matcher.general

 1 FAILED TEST