Re: [PATCH v3] ci: disallow directional formatting
- From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
- Date
- Nov 9, 2021, 13:34 UTC
- Message-ID
- <211109.86bl2tjvns.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqo86utnpi.fsf@gitster.g>
On Mon, Nov 08 2021, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 24 quoted lines
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes: > >>> So you are comparing >>> >>> * requiring bash and C.UTF-8 locale to be available >>> >>> vs >>> >>> * requiring git built with PCRE >>> >>> assuming that "Dscho says doesn't work with PCRE and you say it >>> works with PCRE" is resolved? They seem roughly the same >>> difficulty to me. >> >> We can hard depend on a git built with PCRE, since the point of this >> thing is to run in GitHub CI, Ubuntu builds git with PCRE, and that's >> unlikely to ever change. > > Yes, so is the availability of bash and C.UTF-8 for the same reason: > we are talking about controlled environment. That is what I meant > by "roughly the same difficulty to me". > > FWIW, I am OK with either approach, as I find the patch in question > is just as readable as any rewrite that would use "grep -P", so...
To each his own I guess :) I do find the simple regex of:
'[\N{U+202a}-\N{U+202e}\N{U+2066}-\N{U+2069}]'Much easier to understand than something using printf, shell interpolation, and needing to switch around LC_CTYPE to two different values twice on one line.
But anyway, that's a matter of taste.
What isn't is the issue I noted at the bottom of [1], i.e. if we're relying on '(attr:binary)' we should probably start with an assertion that our idea of "binary" matches reality, or perhaps go back to the -I heuristic.
Because now we've got at least one binary non-attribute-marked file, and if files like that ever get updated they might start matching this pattern. Maybe not a big deal, but someone updating those might confusingly trip over this otherwise...
1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/211103.86zgqlhzvz.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com/