[Piuparts-devel] Bug#698526: Sort known issues by reverse dependency count
anbe at debian.org
Thu Feb 21 10:02:53 UTC 2013
+ if self.inc_re.search( logbody, re.MULTILINE ):
+ for line in logbody.splitlines():
+ if self.inc_re.search( line ):
+ if self.exc_re == None \
+ or not self.exc_re.search(line):
+ return( True )
That looks inefficient. Why do we have to grep twice to identify
matching lines even if we have no exclusion pattern?
Is it for 'foo.*bar' matching on
'The food shop\n....\nSetting up libbar (08-15) ...'
? Hmm, no, DOTALL is off by default.
Anyway, once you have a match, it shouldn't be too difficult to find the
position and identify the matching line without needing to rematch on
each line individually.
Maybe even extend the pattern internally to
to match at BeginOfLine, then add a search for '$' starting from the BoL
to find the corresponding EoL ... and apply the exclusion pattern on the
range found that way.
Disclaimer: I don't really have experience with python re
For combining patterns,
should return something in $1 or $2 depending on what matched (FSVO $1),
that should allow to identify the "pattern number", just ensure to
"escape" all inner parenthesis as (?:...)
PS: for reviewing a series of patches I don't really care about the
author's development history but prefer "rebased, rewritten and
reordered history" to produce an easily readable patch series with small
and self contained patches. (Hint: please fold 'Template HTML format
fix' into the commit it fixes.) Of course rewriting is off limits once
something has been merged into mainline. But I see no gain in merging a
lot of "fixup" commits into mainline if the development branch could
have been rewritten before the merge.
More information about the Piuparts-devel