On Aug 1, 2008, at 1:20 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
"Giuseppe Bilotta" <giuseppe.bilotta@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
...
so I'll wait for a few days to hear any one of the
following happen before deciding what to do with this patch:
(1) Yeah, this is a sufficient and necessary set of keywords, and it
would make my Ruby life so much better;
(2) This might be a good start but you need to cover this and that
keywords as well;
(3) This will misidentify a line that is not the beginning of a
definition, and should not be applied;
Needless to say, "Here is a better patch" is appreciated if
somebody says
(2) or (3).
I wasn't sure about the completeness of the regexp myself, which is
Well, I forgot to say but the above was soliciting third party review;
original submitter does not count ;-)
... nah, I am just joking.
All of the things you said in the message I am responding to are good
background information. It would have been nicer if it were part of
the
initial message, perhaps below the three dash lines, which would have
avoided this extra exchange.
As a Ruby user, the regex for the funcname looks fine to me.
Thanks again for the patch. Somewhere I heard that there are 10
Rubyista
git users for every non Rubyista git user, so I am sure somebody would
comment on your patch in a day or two. Perhaps we might even get
Python
and Perl hunk patterns (although I suspect Perl people are happy
with the
default one we stole from GNU diff) to go with it ;-).
I'd like to point out that Python users are called Pythonistas, Ruby
users are called... uh, Ruby users, I guess.
-Kevin Ballard
--
Kevin Ballard
http://kevin.sb.org
kevin@xxxxxx
http://www.tildesoft.com
--
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
