From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] diff: add ruby funcname pattern Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 01:20:10 -0700 Message-ID: <7v4p65tadh.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1217488908-19692-1-git-send-email-giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com> <7vmyjxtco3.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: "Giuseppe Bilotta" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Aug 01 10:21:21 2008 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 1KOpt1-0002TA-8S for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:21:19 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752280AbYHAIUS (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Aug 2008 04:20:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750984AbYHAIUS (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Aug 2008 04:20:18 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:52695 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750834AbYHAIUQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Aug 2008 04:20:16 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3226549237; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 04:20:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-211.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8501D49236; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 04:20:12 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Giuseppe Bilotta's message of "Fri, 1 Aug 2008 10:11:16 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AB2919E0-5FA2-11DD-8A75-CE28B26B55AE-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Giuseppe Bilotta" writes: > On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > ... >> so I'll wait for a few days to hear any one of the >> following happen before deciding what to do with this patch: >> >> (1) Yeah, this is a sufficient and necessary set of keywords, and it >> would make my Ruby life so much better; >> >> (2) This might be a good start but you need to cover this and that >> keywords as well; >> >> (3) This will misidentify a line that is not the beginning of a >> definition, and should not be applied; >> >> Needless to say, "Here is a better patch" is appreciated if somebody says >> (2) or (3). > > I wasn't sure about the completeness of the regexp myself, which is Well, I forgot to say but the above was soliciting third party review; original submitter does not count ;-) ... nah, I am just joking. All of the things you said in the message I am responding to are good background information. It would have been nicer if it were part of the initial message, perhaps below the three dash lines, which would have avoided this extra exchange. Thanks again for the patch. Somewhere I heard that there are 10 Rubyista git users for every non Rubyista git user, so I am sure somebody would comment on your patch in a day or two. Perhaps we might even get Python and Perl hunk patterns (although I suspect Perl people are happy with the default one we stole from GNU diff) to go with it ;-).