From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS54825 147.75.192.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from ny.mirrors.kernel.org (ny.mirrors.kernel.org [147.75.199.223]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CD9C1F44D for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:40:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ny.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 569201C252B0 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:40:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E65C0364CD; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:40:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [104.130.231.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E4FC31A76 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:40:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=104.130.231.41 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711528809; cv=none; b=kQOAKLwB3NsSwM9qhN9tUJylFmPxqueeajjG/73hW7qyQWKTf341ZR6aeBGx6eTlL5ZPnQQ5IY5NtUyfDCDoTnHvwj1QXzyiNDqfjEMYFCy+WiL1E/S31+9AfxLz5v8+cNtU6gmoWXBKw4WbbDJTYrJiWbcJvp0dnY/vu68W4TQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711528809; c=relaxed/simple; bh=lq6iM27Zcl6tX0yYQpJYVoKnA96AztfB3wSF9Pt4jRE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=jdZkYV9jcxvOuZiSj2eaO7mbs2YOfE2dNKdb2+cS8RDaE3nRSM2ZsiwjyOnF4L0maAlfzzMQmcaNmcS3lVIFLbX/sMSB0V8oZSrpIO2tElv07v/yoV5eQvg1C6EfzlwNP/FHDwxogEYrc08mGcYnQxzOUcFmJZ+RPQek8pmUbXM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=peff.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net; arc=none smtp.client-ip=104.130.231.41 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=peff.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net Received: (qmail 21734 invoked by uid 109); 27 Mar 2024 08:40:06 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:40:06 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 24457 invoked by uid 111); 27 Mar 2024 08:40:11 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 04:40:11 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 04:40:05 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Steven Jeuris via GitGitGadget , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Steven Jeuris , Steven Jeuris Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] userdiff: better method/property matching for C# Message-ID: <20240327084005.GE830163@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 02:38:41PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > userdiff: better method/property matching for C# > > > > Change since v1: I removed "from" from the list of keywords to skip. > > First, I considered adding "await", but I discovered both "await" and > > "from" are "contextual keywords", which unlike the other keywords > > currently listed, aren't reserved, and can thus cause false negatives. > > I.e., it is valid to have a method named "await" or "from". In edge > > cases, this may lead to false positives, but a different exclusion rule > > will need to be added to handle these. > > It seems that this has seen no reviews. I somehow find it doubtful > that Ævar or Peff would be writing too much C# to be familiar with > the language to judge the quality of the patch, but can somebody > with C# background (I hear that its most common use is for > developing Windows applications etc. there) chip in? Yeah, sorry, I have never written a line of C# in my life, so I have been dutifully ignoring this series. :) -Peff