Re: [PATCH] make slash-rules more readable

>> Another thing that I noticed is that its not mentioned anywhere that
>> the pattern use a slash as a directory separator (instead of a
>> backslash), its only clear from the examples. Maybe its worth to
>> mention it in the "PATTERN FORMAT" section. Also its maybe worth to
>> introduce the term "leading slash" and "trailing slash" because they
>> will be of importance of the following paragraphs. Something like this
>> after the paragraph of "!":
>>
>>      [...] for example, "\!important!.txt".
>>
>>      A slash `/` is used as a directory separator.
>>      A leading slash (that is if the pattern begins with a slash)
>>      or a trailing slash (that is if the pattern ends with a slash)
>>      have special meaning and are explained below.
>>
>>      If the pattern contains a trailing slash, it would only find
>>      a match with a directory. [...]
>>
> 
> 
> I changed my mind about this last addition. I think it is not very
> readable and there is no need to explain leading/trailing slash. Maybe
> one could just note it like this:
> 
>       [...] for example, "\!important!.txt".
> 
>       A slash `/` is used as a directory separator.
>       A leading and trailing slash have special meaning
>       and are explained in the following.
> 
>       If the pattern ends with a slash, it would only find
>       a match with a directory. [...]
> 
> then I would also add:
> 
>      If the pattern does not end with a slash, it would find a match
>      with a file or directory.
> 
> 
> Two notes about two sentences that I proposed a while ago:
> 
>> + - If the pattern contains no slash "`/`" (except an optional
> trailing slash),
>> +   the ...
> 
> I think that this sentence is not very readable. The exceptional case in
> the brackets makes it over complicated.
> 
>> + - A pattern that contains a non-trailing slash is matched
> 
> And I don't like this phrase either. I think its too easy to confuse it
> with "A pattern that contains no trailing slash".
> 
> So I would suggest to replace both with the following:
> 
>     If the pattern contains no slash or only a trailing slash, [...].
>     Otherwise (when it contains a non-trailing slash) the pattern
>     is matched [...].