Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> > Should we? Or perhaps: might we? If the answer is yes, we are likely >> > better off with strbuf_split, because then we are only a strbuf_trim() >> > away from making that work. >> >> I also considered the issue of embedded whitespace very early on when >> reading your initial proposal, but didn't mention anything about it >> due to a vague recollection from one of the early reviews (or possibly >> a review of one of Karthik's other patch series) of someone (possibly >> Junio) saying or implying that embedded whitespace would not be >> supported. Unfortunately, I can't locate that message (assuming it >> even exists and wasn't a figment of my imagination). > > Yeah, I could not find any relevant reference (though I didn't spend all > that long digging). > > For reference, I rebuilt Karthik's series on top of my proposal, and the > changes are fairly minor. I pushed it to: > > git://github.com/peff/git.git jk/tweaked-ref-filter > > The tbdiff is below. Hopefully having that done makes it easier to > decide based on the outcome, rather than the pain of rebasing. :) > > To be honest, though, I am now on the fence, considering the possible > whitespace issue. Certainly not having to see s[0]->buf over and over is a huge win ;-). Is the "whitespace issue" a big deal? Does it involve more than a similar sibling to string_list_split() that trims the whitespace around the delimiter (or allows a regexp as a delimiter "\s*,\s*")? -- 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