From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] diff funcname_pattern: Allow HTML header tags without attributes Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 18:46:11 -0700 Message-ID: <7v7i93ws64.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <200809230249.23298.johan@herland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Brandon Casey To: Johan Herland X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Sep 23 03:47:38 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 1Khx01-0002Xu-7K for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 03:47:33 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753891AbYIWBqY (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Sep 2008 21:46:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753864AbYIWBqY (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Sep 2008 21:46:24 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:51656 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753829AbYIWBqY (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Sep 2008 21:46:24 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E37BA644C7; Mon, 22 Sep 2008 21:46:19 -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 250D1644C4; Mon, 22 Sep 2008 21:46:14 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <200809230249.23298.johan@herland.net> (Johan Herland's message of "Tue, 23 Sep 2008 02:49:23 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 6B557BEA-8911-11DD-98BB-D0CFFE4BC1C1-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johan Herland writes: > After looking over this once more, I think the HTML regexp should be > changed as follows. This fixes a buglet that was part of my original > HTML pattern, and although this patch textually depends on Brandon's > work, it is conceptually independent of his refactorization. > ... > - { "html", "^[ \t]*(<[Hh][1-6][ \t].*>.*)$", REG_EXTENDED }, > + { "html", "^[ \t]*(<[Hh][1-6]([ \t].*)?>.*)$", REG_EXTENDED }, I do not think these two particularly would make much difference. Why isn't it simply... "<[Hh][1-6].*" without even any capture or anchor? It would falsely hit oddball cases like which is not

, but anybody who uses such a nonstandard thing deserves it, imnvho ;-).