On Fri, Jan 07, 2022 at 01:57:17PM +0100, René Scharfe wrote:
> Am 06.01.22 um 20:50 schrieb Taylor Blau:
> > René,
> >
> > Here are a couple of extra patches on top of your series which introduce
> > and use a new grep_and_expr() function.
> >
> > Like the final patch says, this isn't about reducing code duplication,
> > but rather about adding visual consistency with the other
> > `compile_pattern_xyz()` functions.
> >
> > Taylor Blau (2):
> > grep: extract grep_binexp() from grep_or_expr()
>
> I considered extracting such a function as well. I'd have called it
> grep_binary_expr(), though, to match the existing names.
>
> I decided against it because it can be misused by passing a non-binary
> kind to it. (That's a weak objection, but the benefit of such a
> function was low already in my mind because it doesn't do much.) You
> solve this by keeping grep_or_expr() and adding grep_and_expr(), which
> cannot be misused in this way -- OK.
That makes sense. If it's keeping you up at night, we could easily add a
check to ensure that `kind` is one of GREP_NODE_OR or GREP_NODE_AND. But
I think that any new code that looks like:
grep_binexp(GREP_NODE_NOT, xyz, NULL);
would probably stick out like a sore thumb. So I doubt that such a check
would buy us much practically speaking.
But I agree that this whole thing probably isn't worth the minimal
effort required, since the couple of patches I posted on top are purely
about cosmetics.
All of that is to say that I'd be happy to see these patches picked up,
and I would also not be sad at all to see them left on the floor.
Thanks,
Taylor
