| 1 |
On Tuesday 02 October 2007, Roy Marples wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 2007-10-01 at 20:22 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> > i'd say that changing |
| 4 |
> > things from doing a case match against proper character classes to doing |
| 5 |
> > a printf against arbitrary character ranges (which btw are not locale |
| 6 |
> > safe, so i imagine you've introduced a regression there) is not "better". |
| 7 |
> > but i'm not the maintainer of said eclass. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> That is why the case match is like so |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> [0-9] Should be safe - every language should operate in base 10 |
| 12 |
> -|.|_ Exact match |
| 13 |
> * If it's not the above, treat it like a letter |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> So there shouldn't be any regressions with version numbers here as I've |
| 16 |
> cunningly avoided the locale trap. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
sorry, you're right ... i thought i saw a [A-Z] in there, but it was probably |
| 19 |
that the old one used [:alpha:] |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
that said, there's no reason to change [[:digit:]] to [0-9] ... using proper |
| 22 |
character classes is preferred over custom rangers regardless |
| 23 |
-mike |
Archives