From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A720F1F506 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 18:07:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="SWP+tHMH"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230323AbiIUSHG (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:07:06 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39012 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230179AbiIUSHB (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:07:01 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (pb-smtp2.pobox.com [64.147.108.71]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3967867172 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 11:06:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 597F315203F; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:06:58 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=6QbqpdByac+u P2KWPeuz9Yu/qfjicLzjjYceOLCGjv8=; b=SWP+tHMHSI3eAjmLg3gOQwZhAoBl 0Beifo6zYYFLntan+i3KVyAq6ypEc7W9ZKdbv2bHR/V1ydB5K2F5FwyHF3kJKDak Tzu6dWsDpGCnxvoDZXl3SJc8oziW8S17svO/11cbK121o10ia6bKCc2LsaBJOT5V jBHljVwp7iqLmSU= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FB4815203E; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:06:58 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.83.5.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ADB9F15203D; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:06:57 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?xJBvw6BuIFRy4bqnbiBDw7RuZw==?= Danh Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, SZEDER =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor?= , Phillip Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] t: remove \{m,n\} from BRE grep usage References: Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2022 11:06:56 -0700 In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?B?IsSQb8OgbiBUcuG6p24gQ8O0bmc=?= Danh"'s message of "Wed, 21 Sep 2022 20:02:30 +0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 2EAF33C0-39D8-11ED-A4E1-307A8E0A682E-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org =C4=90o=C3=A0n Tr=E1=BA=A7n C=C3=B4ng Danh writes= : > The CodingGuidelines says we should avoid \{m,n\} in BRE usage. > And their usages in our code base is limited, and subjectively > hard to read. > > Replace them with ERE. OK. I do not personally mind allowing \{0,1\} in BRE (which would give us a portable way to express '?'), but we are not forbidding ERE in any way, so I am OK with the direction. > Except for "0\{40\}" which would be changed to "$ZERO_OID", > which is a better value for testing with: > GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_HASH=3Dsha256 Absolutely. This alone is a change worth doing regardless of the portability issues. > Signed-off-by: =C4=90o=C3=A0n Tr=E1=BA=A7n C=C3=B4ng Danh > --- > > Phillip Wood said: > > \{m,n\} is valid in a posix BRE[1]. If we're already using it withou= t > > anyone > > complaining I think it would be better to update CodingGuidlines to = allow > > it. > > Yes, I agree. However, I think our usage of \{m,n\} is limited. > Let's skip the lifting for now. OK.