Johan Herland <> writes:

> Obviously, I named it '%1' since it expands into the _first_ component
> of the (slash-separated) shorthand.

OK, I can buy something like


that is, for a pattern that has %*, we feed the end-user string as a
whole, and for a pattern that has %1 thru %N, we find an appropriate
way to chop the end-user string into N pieces (e.g. nick/name would
be split into %1 = nick, %2 = name, while foo/bar/baz might have two
possibilities, <%1, %2> = <foo, bar/baz> or <foo/bar, baz>).  The
earlier ones on the above list can even be written with their %*
substituted with %1 if we go that route.

And that makes perfect sense, and is exactly the kind of "you plan
to have %2 and %3 that falls into the same category as %1" I was
asking you about in the message.

So, no more objection to %1 from me, if that is the direction you
are taking us.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to