Re: PATCH: Re: 3.1.6-dev-22

[Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bart Schaefer wrote:

> On Apr 11,  9:54am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
> } Subject: PATCH: Re: 3.1.6-dev-22
> }
> } I wrote:
> } 
> } - The change to file-patterns suggested by Peter (I planned to send
> }   this in a separate patch and then accidentally overwrote it, sorry).
> }   I.e. it looks a bit more like tags-order, one can do:
> } 
> }     ... file-patterns '*.o:obj-files *(-/):dirs' ...
> } 
> }   Giving more than one pattern per string, with different tags. Small
> }   problem: one can still give more than one pattern per tag -- and has 
> }   to separate them with commas. I don't like that, it's different from 
> }   every other separation character we have.
> 
> One possibility is to use the familiar brace expansion syntax:
> 
>   ... file-patterns '{*.(a|o),*(*)}:compiled-files *(-/):dirs' ...
> 
> In fact, that syntax could be used everywhere that multiple glob patterns
> are presently separated by spaces, which would e.g. make it clearer that
> all the patterns in a PATTERNS:TAG form were associated with the TAG.
> However, that's a much bigger change, and I don't know whether it makes
> parsing a lot more difficult.

Damn, I was thinking about that, too, yesterday and then forgot it
again. I'll have a look...

> That also "looks like" it should mean:
> 
>   ... file-patterns '*.(a|o):compiled-files *(*):compiled-files ...' ...
> 
> which ought to be supported as equivalent if it isn't yet, that is,
> mentioning a tag a second time in the same string should union rather
> than replace the previous patterns for that tag.

Of course it does that (I also mentioned it in one of my replies to
Peter, I think).

It does that more-or-less automatically, btw. Because of the same tag
they end up in the same group.

Bye
 Sven


--
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx