Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Monday 2012-01-09 23:33, Jeff King wrote:
>>On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 11:43:21AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>
>>>>>+static inline void check_bogus_wildcard(const char *file, const char *p)
>>>>>+{
>>>>>+ if (strstr(p, "**") == NULL)
>>>>>+ return;
>>>>>+ warning(_("Pattern \"%s\" from file \"%s\": Double asterisk does not "
>>>>>+ "have a special meaning and is interpreted just like a single "
>>>>>+ "asterisk.\n"), file, p);
>>
>>You only have to implement proper backslash decoding, so I think it is
>>not as hard as reimplementing fnmatch:
>>[...]
>>
>>That being said, if this is such a commonly-requested feature
>
> Was it actually requested, or did you mean "commonly attempted use"?
>
> As I see it, foo/**/*.o for example is equal to placing "*.o" in
> foo/.gitignore, so the feature is already implemented, just not
> through the syntax people falsely assume it is.
You can either adjust the people, i.e. teach that their "false" assumption
is wrong and the feature they expect is available but not in a way that
they expect.
Or you can adjust the tool to match their expectation.
The point that Peff correctly read between my lines is that in real life,
people are harder to train than tools and often the latter is a better
approach, especially if it does not amount to too much more work than
doing the former.
--
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