Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 01:01:42 +0200 From: Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg> To: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com> Cc: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org>, ports@FreeBSD.org, jkh@FreeBSD.org, Edwin Groothuis <mavetju@chello.nl> Subject: Re: Request for comments [Fwd: bin/24695: [patch] pkg_info: prefix search for a package] Message-ID: <20010206010142.E17885@ringworld.oblivion.bg> In-Reply-To: <8064.981413776@winston.osd.bsdi.com>; from jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com on Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 02:56:16PM -0800 References: <roam@orbitel.bg> <8064.981413776@winston.osd.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 02:56:16PM -0800, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > But do you really mean regexp-style wildcards, or merely shell-globbing > > wildcards? If it's just shell globbing, that's much easier to do - > > just an additional fnmatch() call. > > Well, I could go both ways. People are generally a lot more familiar > with shell globbing syntax and tend to understand "*foo*" over > ".*foo.*" (unless they're regexp weenies like me) but regexps are far > more powerful and also delight the engineers. Maybe make it an > option. ;) Don't get me wrong, I *love* regexps too :) Just.. maybe shell globbing shall be a bit more POLA-friendly, don't you think? And then, regexp globbing activated by a cmdline option.. mmmmmmm! :) (and possibly a shell alias which sets that option by default...) G'luck, Peter -- I am the thought you are now thinking. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010206010142.E17885>