Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > In time: I mean *possible* POSIX violations. > > I very much prefer more backslashs than needed or use re.escape() > than to read thoughtfully POSIX and Python-specific specific rules. > > Python, in particular, is not very reliable between versions - each > new version comes with a set of incompatible changes. People like to complain about that ... but the LWN site code has been in Python since 2002, and with the notable exception of the Python 3 transition, it has been really painless. FWIW, the 3.13 re module will warn if it sees a construction like "[[]" - evidently there is a possible future change that might make "[[" mean something special and new. So I avoided that combination. > In summary, if you agree with always escape brackets, curly brackets and > parenthesis inside brackets on kernel-doc, we should be free of not > opened/not closed "symbols" with is an annoyance at least for me, and > we should be freed of possible POSIX issues and undefined behavior(*). It shall be a mighty struggle, but I think I can find a way to live with that... :) Thanks, jon
