ivy.el (ivy--occur-insert-lines): fix incorrect regexp. #1846
Conversation
mookid
force-pushed
the
fix_ivy_occur_insert_lines_re
branch
from
738dbb1
to
32a5e69
Compare
ivy-test.el
Outdated
| (should | ||
| (equal | ||
| '((ok) (ok)) | ||
| (delete |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
delete can be delq here.
ivy-test.el
Outdated
| (cons "test3" 'fail) | ||
| (cons "t/est4" 'fail) | ||
| (cons "t\\est5" 'fail) | ||
| (cons "tes./t6" 'fail))))))) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nitpick: Strings and symbols are self-quoting, and we're not modifying the alist, so a literal '(("..." . ok) ...) would suffice here.
Having said that, I think this test can be written in a more straight-forward way:
(mapc (lambda (p)
(should (eq (and (ivy--starts-with-dotslash (car p)) t)
(cdr p))))
'(("./test1" . t)
(".\\test2" . t)
("test3")
("t/est4")
("t\\est5")
("tes./t6")))or similar. Having said that, it is more idiomatic to keep logic to a minimum in ERT tests:
(should (ivy--starts-with-dotslash "./test1"))
(should (ivy--starts-with-dotslash ".\\test2"))
(should (not (ivy--starts-with-dotslash "test3")))
(should (not (ivy--starts-with-dotslash "t/est4")))
(should (not (ivy--starts-with-dotslash "t\\est5")))
(should (not (ivy--starts-with-dotslash "tes./t6")))Although I'm not usually a fan of repeating myself, tests are an exception where the latter style is instantly more obvious and possibly produces cleaner backtraces (though I'm not sure about this last point).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I did not really pay much attention to the way these were written to be honest.
I like the last option more.
ivy--starts-with-dotslash: new function.
mookid
force-pushed
the
fix_ivy_occur_insert_lines_re
branch
from
32a5e69
to
dd019b0
Compare
|
Thanks. |
(ivy--dirname-p, ivy--magic-file-slash): Simplify now that Ivy requires Emacs 24.5 or later by using string-suffix-p instead of slower regexp matching. (ivy--occur-insert-lines): Escape leading dot in regexp by using existing helper ivy--starts-with-dotslash. Re: abo-abo#1817, abo-abo#1845, abo-abo#1846
Currently the . seems too permissive and should be escaped.
the correct one was given by @basil-conto in #1817 (comment) of course (: