Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 11:53 AM Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 09:00:02PM +0700, Đoàn Trần Công Danh wrote: >> > Fix it by using literal `+` instead. >> >> This makes sense, I think. It could hurt a sed which is expected ERE and >> needs the "+" escaped, but I think such a sed would be wrong (and I >> imagine would break things elsewhere). > > I had the same thought and considered suggesting a character class: > > sed -n -e "1,4d" -e "s/^[+]//p" <"$1" >.tmp-1 > > to make it painfully obvious that "+" is not special in the > expression. But then I thought better of it -- for the same reason as > you (to wit: such a 'sed' would be wrong) -- and decided against > saying anything. I have only one thing that needs fixing, which is s/compliance/compliant/; on the title. Other than that, it looks good. Having said that, I would have done the [+] thing if I were doing this patch myself. As long as we see no "wrong" sed that is broken by this change, I am OK with it, though. Thanks.
