From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Miles Bader Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] git-bisect: war on "sed" Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:59:28 +0900 Message-ID: References: <20071115081807.06fe092b.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> <7voddv6fxz.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <995F69D5-4ABC-44E7-BA2B-5E276479EDA1@wincent.com> <86tznn4y7v.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <861war4uzp.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> Reply-To: Miles Bader Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: David Kastrup X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Nov 15 14:00:03 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IseKA-0003MD-G0 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 14:00:02 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752891AbXKOM7p (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2007 07:59:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752099AbXKOM7p (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2007 07:59:45 -0500 Received: from TYO201.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.193]:49947 "EHLO tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751170AbXKOM7n (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2007 07:59:43 -0500 Received: from relay21.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.50]) by tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.4) with ESMTP id lAFCxLGw005432; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:59:28 +0900 (JST) Received: from relay31.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.16] [10.29.19.16]) by relay21.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:59:28 +0900 Received: from dhapc248.dev.necel.com ([10.114.112.215] [10.114.112.215]) by relay31.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:59:28 +0900 Received: by dhapc248.dev.necel.com (Postfix, from userid 31295) id 9DA7B43B; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 21:59:28 +0900 (JST) System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Blat: Foop In-Reply-To: <861war4uzp.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> (David Kastrup's message of "Thu\, 15 Nov 2007 12\:18\:50 +0100") Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: David Kastrup writes: >> For typical straightforward usage, there seems little problem. >> >> [The main portability problems I've actually _noticed_ with sed are >> the "-e" versus ";" issue and what happens with "\n" in various >> contexts...] > > What about character classes containing the pattern delimiter, \+, \?, > \|, nested grouping, anchors in groups, * after groups? That's all > rather straightforward usage. You're right that the regexp stuff is not really "dusty corners", but none of those affect typical sed usage I think -- most sed usage being really rather simple (and the old "regexps differ between traditional unix tools" issue tends to dampen enthusiasm for really complex regexps with those tools). I looked over the various random uses of sed I have locally (a couple of hundred instances), and the only thing which would potentially affect any of them would be the SVR3 thing about no nested groups (does anybody actually care about SVR3 though?!?). -Miles -- Yo mama's so fat when she gets on an elevator it HAS to go down.