Re: mutt/2402: damaged regexps in folder-hooks
The following reply was made to PR mutt/2402; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Brendan Cully <brendan@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: bug-any@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc:
Subject: Re: mutt/2402: damaged regexps in folder-hooks
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 09:34:57 -0700
On Thursday, 03 August 2006 at 17:45, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> The following reply was made to PR mutt/2402; it has been noted by GNATS.
>
> From: Rocco Rutte <pdmef@xxxxxxx>
> To: bug-any@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: mutt/2402: damaged regexps in folder-hooks
> Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 15:36:03 +0000
>
> Hi,
>
> * Alain Bench [06-08-03 17:15:01 +0200] wrote:
>
> > <brainstorming> Is there really a problem outside of "^"? Other
> > shortcuts are "! > < - !! ~ = + @". All of them expand only when in
> > first position.
>
> Right.
>
> > Otherwise: Why are they expanded if backslashed? They don't need to
> > (outside of ! because of ! negation)? "^a" could be expanded to
> > "/tmp/nomatchABCa", but "\^a" to "^a" regexp. Hum... One backslash is
> > stripped too early, right?
>
> Yepp: already when reading/tokenizing the line.
>
> > They are not expanded if double\\ed. One backslash reaches the
> > regexp engine. This doesn't hurt normal chars, but of course hurts "^".
> > Grrr...
>
> So you tried it, too? :)
>
> Another idea: we simply rename '^' to something else and announce that
> with big fat warnings. We can continue to support '^' except for when
> _mutt_expand_path() get's a regexp. That would add an extra 'case' label
> as well as a check for the rx parameter.
I think this is the only sensible thing to do. Let's use '.' instead
:)
I don't think '^' has been in use long enough to warrant
backward-compatibility hacks.