On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 11:58:14AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Antti Keränen <antti@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 11:36:21AM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote: > >> Ack, I noticed this too during my review, but apparently forgot to > >> comment on it. I'm puzzled by the first '..*'. If you're searching for > >> any non-empty string, how about '.+' instead? > > > > That's true. Good point. I pretty much copy&pasted the 'todo count' test > > so I didn't give this much thought. I'll fix this. > > Please don't shorten ..* into .+ if you are writing a portable sed > script---stick to the BRE. Sure, and sorry -- I didn't know that we cared about the difference between BRE and ERE. Do you prefer ..* over .\+? Both should be supported in BRE, if I'm reading [1] correctly. Thanks, Taylor [1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/sed/manual/html_node/BRE-vs-ERE.html#BRE-vs-ERE
