On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 12:00:07PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > Maybe it requires more thinking about? > I think it is still possible to extend existing, rather to take workarounds > like this one. Yeah, agreed. > > So, I wrote a patch series that removes the string_escape_mem flags that > > aren't used > > Have you considered the potential users that can be converted to use > string_escape_mem()? > > I know about at least one (needs to be reworked a bit, but it is in slow > progress). > > There are potentially others that would be converted using "unused" flags. OK, that'd be interesting to know about. > > >, simplifies it a bit, then separates the flags into two > > different types: those that select which characters to escape > > (non-printable, non-ascii, whitespace, etc.) and those that choose a > > style of escaping to use (octal, hex, or \\). That seems to make the > > code a little easier to extend while still covering the cases people > > actually use. I'll try to get those out this week and you can tell me > > what you think. > > Will be glad to help! > > In any case regarding to this one, I would like rather to see it's never > appeared, or now will be gone in favour of string_escape_mem() extension. To be clear, it's already merged. Apologies, I actually saw your name when looking for people to cc, but the last commit was 5 years ago and I assumed you'd moved on. The project to extend string_escape_mem() looked more complicated than I first expected so I decided to merge this first and then follow up with my attempt at that. --b.
