Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Em Thu, 31 Jul 2025 18:13:17 -0600
> Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> escreveu:
>
>> A lot of the regular expressions in this file have extraneous backslashes
>
> This one is a bit scary... It could actually cause issues somewhere.
What kind of issues?
> Also, IMHO, some expressions look worse on my eyes ;-)
Here I think we're going to disagree. The extra backslashes are really
just visual noise as far as I'm concerned.
>> that may have been needed in Perl, but aren't helpful here. Take them out
>> to reduce slightly the visual noise.
>
> No idea if Perl actually requires, but, at least for me, I do prefer to
> see all special characters properly escaped with a backslash. This way,
> it is a lot clearer that what it is expecting is a string, instead of
> using something that may affect regex processing.
I guess my point is that, in the given cases, the characters in question
*aren't* special.
>> - param = KernRe(r'[\[\)].*').sub('', param, count=1)
>> + param = KernRe(r'[)[].*').sub('', param, count=1)
>
> This one, for instance, IMHO looks a lot worse for my eyes to understand
> that there is a "[" that it is not an operator, but instead a string.
> The open close parenthesis also looks weird. My regex-trained eyes think
> that this would be part of a capture group.
...and mine say "that's in [brackets] why are you escaping it?" :)
>> if dtype == "" and param.endswith("..."):
>> if KernRe(r'\w\.\.\.$').search(param):
>> @@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ class KernelDoc:
>>
>> for arg in args.split(splitter):
>> # Strip comments
>> - arg = KernRe(r'\/\*.*\*\/').sub('', arg)
>> + arg = KernRe(r'/\*.*\*/').sub('', arg)
>
> A pattern like /..../ is a standard way to pass search group with Regex
> on many languages and utils that accept regular expressions like the
> sed command. Dropping the backslash here IMHO makes it confusing ;-)
...but it is definitely not any such in Python and never has been, so
escaping slashes looks weird and makes the reader wonder what they are
missing.
> Seriously, IMHO this patch makes a lot worse to understand what brackets,
> parenthesis and dots are strings, and which ones are part of the regex
> syntax.
So I guess I won't fight this one to the death, but I really do
disagree. Writing regexes in a non-canonical style just makes it harder
for anybody else who comes along to figure out what is going on; it
certainly made it harder for me.
Thanks,
jon
