Re: [PATCH] rebase -i: Fix possibly wrong onto hash in todo

From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Date: Aug 11, 2020, 19:01 UTC
Message-ID: <20200811190139.GB34058@syl.lan>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqsgct9fi1.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 11:58:14AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> Antti Keränen <antti@keraset.fi> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 11:36:21AM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote:
> >> Ack, I noticed this too during my review, but apparently forgot to
> >> comment on it. I'm puzzled by the first '..*'. If you're searching for
> >> any non-empty string, how about '.+' instead?
> >
> > That's true. Good point. I pretty much copy&pasted the 'todo count' test
> > so I didn't give this much thought. I'll fix this.
>
> Please don't shorten ..* into .+ if you are writing a portable sed
> script---stick to the BRE.

Sure, and sorry -- I didn't know that we cared about the difference between BRE and ERE. Do you prefer ..* over .\+? Both should be supported in BRE, if I'm reading [1] correctly.

Thanks, Taylor

[1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/sed/manual/html_node/BRE-vs-ERE.html#BRE-vs-ERE