Hi Tim, thanks for your feedback.
On 04/10/13 at 11:12am, Tim Bird wrote: > ... > > The cleanup was mainly mechanical and I still don't understand the toy > > well. (Before and after the cleanup) there seems to be a problem with > > the rule parsing/interpretation. For example > > > > find . \( -type f -type f \) -o -type d > > > > does not print directories. > > Hmmm. I'm not sure that's a legal filter expression. what is > "-type f -type f"? Is there supposed to be an operator (-a or -o) > in there? > > In general, regular find may be a little more liberal interpreting > filter expressions than the find toy. I think that regular find > will often imply an 'and' when no operator is specified. I considered > this for the find toy, but didn't want to gum up the parser with weird > handling. I know that lots of times people do things like string a bunch > of filters together without 'and's, like so: > find . -type f -name "*.o" -mtime -20 > > These types of sequential and's ought to be supported. But allowing > for unspecified 'and's in weird places in a complex parse expression > seems like overkill for a toy. POSIX says that -a is optional. Adding in "-a" does still not print directories. > There used to be debug code in the find toy to dump the expression tree, > but Rob removed it. (I'm not complaining, I think the code should have > been removed eventually). To debug this, please use a debugger to make > sure the filter expression tree matches what you think it should be based > on the command line, then verify that the actually filtering (expression > evaluation) proceeds as desired. > > With the missing operator between '-type f' and '-type f' above, I'm not > even sure what the desired expression is. Thanks for the debugging hints. > > The toy also does not follow the whitespace conventions in toybox. But I > > think that someone has scripts lying around to fix that. > > > > I think that some function parameters should be made const and that > > the code could be made less repetitive. > > Thanks very much for working on this. I haven't had time to look > at it myself, and I'm very glad to see someone taking it up. :-) > 'find' is one of the most significant omissions in toolbox, and one > of the most useful things to have in the toy arsenal (IMHO). > > I'll send some comments on the patch in another mail. I'm looking forward it. > -- Tim Felix _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
