@@ -79,6 +79,16 @@ PATTERNS("cpp", "|[-+0-9.e]+[fFlL]?|0[xXbB]?[0-9a-fA-F]+[lL]?" "|[-+*/<>%&^|=!]=|--|\\+\\+|<<=?|>>=?|&&|\\|\\||::|->" "|[^[:space:]]|[\x80-\xff]+"), +PATTERNS("csharp", + "!^[ \t]*(catch|do|for|if|instanceof|new|return|switch|throw|while)\n" + "^([ \t]*(static|public|internal|private|protected|new|unsafe|readonly|volatile)[ \t]+(class|enum|interface|struct).*)$\n" + "^([ \t]*(namespace)[ \t]+.*)$"I think the placement of parentheses could be improved in these two expressions (but I don't know for sure because I don't know the code well enough). Looking at the other examples in userdiff.c, I infer that the *first* opening parentheses defines which part is copied to the hunk header.
Yes.
Since you placed everything into parentheses (unnecessarily, I think),
No, not unnecessarily because otherwise only "public" for example would be copied. I agree though that leading whitespace should not be included in the parentheses.
Paolo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html