Thanks for the feedback! I have enough information to write a v2 now, but I'm focusing on adding new functionality to change state in Patchwork. I'll likely be able to write v2 within the next 2 weeks.
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 2:52 PM Emily Shaffer <emilyshaf...@google.com> wrote: > Hm, does the nesting level of the comments really matter? Or is the > issue that they may be multiline? > > That is - it's pretty trivial to write a regex to match > (foo(bar)baz((quot)meh)), as long as you don't actually care about the > semantics of the nesting. There are odd examples (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2822#page-47) where nesting can occur. > I *think* this is the bit that's making it not support nesting. > "Match anything besides another open- or close-paren". > > https://docs.python.org/3/library/re.html tells me that Python treats > '*' as greedy by default, so wouldn't "\(.*\)" handle nested comments? > Or is there an issue that you can have more that one, e.g. > > In-Reply-To: (danica's mail) abcd1-40...@mail.google.com (from gnus) > > in which case greedy-matching would also obliterate the actual > message-id? I believe multiple comments are possible, especially in the context of references where parentheses could be attached to separate message-ids. So, I think message-ids would be cut out in those cases by "\(.*\)". > This actually brings to mind that I'd like to see an example of one such > problematic line in the commit message, if you've got one handy. My commit message references the spec for an example of an In-Reply-To field being problematic because of a comment. > Hum. Is there a test suite we can add a regression test to for this > specific kind of line format? I will be working on adding tests for v2. Luckily, what to consider for a comment was still being addressed :) _______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
