On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 02:19:37AM -0700, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón wrote: > first patch was suggested[1] by Peff, so hopefully my commit message > and his assumed SoB are still worth not mixing it with patch 2 (which > has a slight different but related focus and touches the same files) > but since it is no longer a single patch, lets go wild. My SoB is fine there (though really Ævar did the actual thinking; I just deleted a lot of lines in vim :) ). Patch 2 looks good to me, though I kind of wonder if it is even worth having an option to turn it off. > patches 3 and 4 are optional and mostly for RFC, so that a solution > to any possible issue that the retiring of USE_PARENS_AROUND_GETTEXT_N > are addressed. IMHO the issue it is trying to find is not worth the inevitable problems that hacky perl parsing of C will cause (both false positives and negatives). Not a statement on your perl code, but just based on previous experience. So I'd probably take the first two patches, and leave the others. -Peff
