Re: [RFC/PATCH] attr: map builtin userdiff drivers to well-known extensions

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Aug 26, 2011, 02:45 UTC
Message-ID: <20110826024533.GB17625@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <5qgbkjmEZ8jSRkpVNieElg1bcVbuEStD525CFu1hZPQ7F03R3EzjXwQdDKQBOnR1zWDiZBsGu53K20rbOGpYd6rmp2-e-ZI3Z42BKT01TVI@cipher.nrlssc.navy.mil>

On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 05:29:36PM -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:

> > Also, any other extensions that would go into such a list?
> 
> *.bib diff=bibtex
> *.tex diff=tex

I had those ones already. ;P

> *.[Ff] diff=fortran
> *.[Ff][0-9][0-9] diff=fortran

Thanks, I'll add those. I don't see a big problem with generalizing f[0-9][0-9] to always be fortran, even though many of those numbers aren't used. I don't think I've ever seen one used for anything else.

Should all of our matches be case-insensitive? That is, should we be matching both .HTML and .html? Clearly lowercase is the One True Way, but I don't know what kind of junk people with case-insensitive filesystems have, or whether we should even worry about it.

> Wikipedia says that .for is an extension for fortran, but I've never
> seen that in the wild.  Maybe it's a windows thing (3-char ext).

We can leave it out. It's easy enough for somebody to add their own gitattribute if they want, or to even complain that it should be in the default set. I was trying to keep this list to the utterly common, not become a catalogue of obscure fortran customs. :)

-Peff