From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ee0-f47.google.com ([74.125.83.47]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TisbI-0007kf-NR for bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 21:08:16 +0100 Received: by mail-ee0-f47.google.com with SMTP id e51so736895eek.6 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 11:53:43 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent :x-gm-message-state; bh=+WjbiddW6+ppkCLHCdL1j0m38Fx89gSsYl5dAJN4ydQ=; b=MDDroVwjLRkrzRx6nL+ld21qm7FQS/qMRS0OCglGB0/s/jSH6FQhtuP2p2bTFnhBWz T4YTqnR9bKrSOHfoKSP9udTkWJfbg1/Qh7KYRIUv1EEjIbkyazOhEKdUmsDMLgBdqc0z y1KOQ2obnU8ejtZWuRZ5ASEvQIDiFQz0LmmKAVrUU7VhmfIlV20j3HozMSMWJ+p/qNXs fAVbtS4ZR4bs5IEZZc0ylxzInvEqWYkzqYQWUKUQmHceYJ7UO2gCanKJyLBJomCspQPz 32iAx0z6k7B+4+wtm1UzxaVcwFFuZwbT0CCbp/Qw7eVmmuayBPeHfEGghDSoXX/a/oaE 0lBA== Received: by 10.14.176.66 with SMTP id a42mr5529035eem.34.1355342022769; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 11:53:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from gmail.com ([46.196.117.99]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 6sm45884338eea.3.2012.12.12.11.53.40 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 12 Dec 2012 11:53:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 21:53:35 +0200 From: Eren =?iso-8859-1?Q?T=FCrkay?= To: "Robert P. J. Day" Message-ID: <20121212195335.GB743@gmail.com> References: <20121212184156.GA743@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnUyJ1mlTPNKMSdCxyHJMMX62ILxWqTu3RIl8ccAeXugXUI8S49mfALeqgIYo5pmV5OA1un Cc: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] bitbake.vim: detect *.bbappend files in ftdetect automatically X-BeenThere: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 20:08:16 -0000 X-Groupsio-MsgNum: 3032 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="GLp9dJVi+aaipsRk" Content-Disposition: inline --GLp9dJVi+aaipsRk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 01:57:53PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > gack. there's no compelling reason to be that, um, pedantic with > the wildcard pattern. just use >=20 > *.{bb,bbappend,bbclass} >=20 > trying to save a couple characters while introducing that kind of > visual ugliness just isn't worth it. It can be used but I was not the one who introduced "that kind of visual ugliness" :) I just sticked with the old one, adding bbappend. Visual ugliness/goodness depends on person to person. To me, it doesn't look ugly at all. I've seen things uglier than just an innocent wildcard pattern. Regards, Eren --=20 . 73! DE TA1AET http://linkedin.com/in/erenturkay --GLp9dJVi+aaipsRk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (Darwin) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQyOC/AAoJEOM7bMm6HhcTytsQAJ3+jsrtpj2XKPiKrhZ57oTm wdqz7r3gBnWAoETDv1mi3BQaTqdd2TuMqD75Y5PUGqvjXHP031YHsi8QJPU6+3os fpxHGNcWAmg3XnrQ5L+BUfsICfSWW1KVoLBQ+OIwZmd/x6hB48ERaXS4C9xNIQhw XFH/VvkIQqctWmEp3xwyJEVRz7emVZFEFw3fCCJSHXGEXUfy0VSgWDMDLS7d3Q7q aaLjPztBopdeRrtNbmM4lFESTFb5Z0l3sFoulBHF4rSnYPVddGmQAekm2H4C3a1Y c9ETI8RThCabBZGl2M3iQqF4u+3i7yNS/MXy5L+3b+SLzjD/xwZ4/XFvsh+dlAvk nrzAcRK02ZHMKIazi/fJaMPXb3HaZqZMXGwJ0Lsgn1UAT8hHCmqCg11F8iajzBoV aiCEhfMbEYDM9DEkZs850IlfGKgIUgB30XgxSzGzdOLBqbuCV8oG6je2WxxtUygE I68H2Ctpc/9hZOuCCq9RRfiVDpJMsMkDgjg+EP2Osefznt5KwcFw87vaV/v2iqzx IGuUJCCo5JpHX/YIMsbRHLf0KlPXqycaaMO2qzinzmsXm7vZnlXu+oDGXFmNSZAt dw62DSnYoHsOO5paMHfCqFODDiDQheek3bTAY9BmTOMq+Ab/fkKVz9CpQR2jOnMl vdNmK3In2q/1q6mNazcl =J+jN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --GLp9dJVi+aaipsRk--