| 1 |
On 10/25/2014 01:41 PM, Micha³ Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dnia 2014-10-25, o godz. 13:28:54 |
| 3 |
> Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> napisa³(a): |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> On 10/25/2014 01:25 PM, Micha³ Górny wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> Dnia 2014-10-25, o godz. 12:42:14 |
| 7 |
>>> Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> napisa³(a): |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>>>> On 10/25/2014 09:15 AM, Michael Palimaka wrote: |
| 10 |
>>>>> +eqalog() { |
| 11 |
>>>>> + local tag=$1 x |
| 12 |
>>>>> + shift |
| 13 |
>>>>> + for x in "$@" ; do |
| 14 |
>>>>> + echo "${tag}" "${x}" >> "${T}"/qa.log |
| 15 |
>>>>> + done |
| 16 |
>>>>> +} |
| 17 |
>>>> |
| 18 |
>>>> Your patches look good to me, except that I think eqalog should escape |
| 19 |
>>>> any \n characters that might be embedded in the arguments. |
| 20 |
>>> |
| 21 |
>>> Why? That sounds like some unsafe fancy feature only one person would |
| 22 |
>>> use. Embedding newlines in bash is trivial, why make them implicit with |
| 23 |
>>> a lot of added complexity? |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>> Because the caller should not be concerned about the qa.log file format. |
| 26 |
>> The fact that it's delimited by newlines is an implementation detail |
| 27 |
>> that the caller need know nothing about. Escaping the new lines is |
| 28 |
>> really not all that complex. All of the elog functions have similar |
| 29 |
>> handling for newlines. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Oh, you mean converting from newlines to \n escapes? I thought |
| 32 |
> the opposite way, sorry then. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Right, that's what my sample code does. |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Thanks, |
| 37 |
Zac |
Archives