Re: Having grep support the -o option

>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22 2022, Christian Couder wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 8:14 PM Jayati Shrivastava <gaurijove@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 9:49 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
> >> <avarab@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > One thing I'd *really* like to see is the bits of %(if) %(then)
> >> > etc. extracted from ref-filter.c into some general API other commands
> >> > could use with strbuf_expand() and friends.
> >> >
> >> > I.e. if you could in addition to the strbuf_expand() callback define
> >> > what verbs you support for "if" and the like, or have callbacks for
> >> > their comparison functions.
> >> >
> >> > Then have that machinery drive the whole format expansion, which
> >> > eventually would expand your %(some-custom-thing) via a callback.
> >> >
> >> > I.e. the whole "valid_atom" state machine in ref-filter.c.
> >>
> >> So, the end goal is to design a formatting API that can be used by any
> >> command that takes --format option?
> >
> > It might be nice if we get closer to this after your GSoC project, but
> > I don't think it should become the main goal of the GSoC.
>
> Agreed. FWIW this is off-list discussion between Jayati and myself which
> started with her asking (and this was omitted in the context that made
> it on list:
>
>     [...] Infact, I'll be excited to work on anything you suggest even
>     if its not related to the project, as it will help me get familiar
>     with the codebase and the contribution process at Git.
>
> So that suggestion of mine of generalizing ref-filter.c wasn't meant to
> distract from the GSoC project, I understood her to be looking for
> suggestions for things to work on that were *not* part of the GSoC
> project.
>
> So I suggested that ref-filter.c task, which is orthagonal, but relates
> to some of the same code.