s/A*./B/g editor bug?

[Doug Gwyn]

In article <3522 at aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> bink at aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (9704) writes:
-I've noticed the ED s///g command works incorrectly when given the command
-	s/b*a/c/g
-on the input line
-	aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
-Is this a confirmed bug in the RE matcher or the substitute code, and has
-it been resolved?  This sounds trivial, but it did cause real problems.

I believe it's a real bug.  The corresponding "sam" x/b*a/c/c/ works as
you expected the "ed" command to work.