"Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" [off-list ref]
writes:
+# U+202a..U+2a2e: LRE, RLE, PDF, LRO and RLO
+# U+2066..U+2069: LRI, RLI, FSI and PDI
+regex='(\u202a|\u202b|\u202c|\u202d|\u202e|\u2066|\u2067|\u2068|\u2069)'
+
+! git ls-files -z ':(attr:!binary)' |
+LC_CTYPE=C xargs -0r git grep -Ele "$(LC_CTYPE=C.UTF-8 printf "$regex")" --
One thing for the future, and one thing for the present.
- Do some languages we would add to po/ hierarchy in the future
possibly want to use these sequences as legitimate contents?
- Do we need ls-files?
For the latter, shouldn't the attribute-based pathspec work just
fine with "git grep"? i.e.
git grep -l -E -e $pattern -- ':(exclude,attr:binary)'
Hi Junio,
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021, Junio C Hamano wrote:
"Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" [off-list ref]
writes:
quoted
+# U+202a..U+2a2e: LRE, RLE, PDF, LRO and RLO
+# U+2066..U+2069: LRI, RLI, FSI and PDI
+regex='(\u202a|\u202b|\u202c|\u202d|\u202e|\u2066|\u2067|\u2068|\u2069)'
+
+! git ls-files -z ':(attr:!binary)' |
+LC_CTYPE=C xargs -0r git grep -Ele "$(LC_CTYPE=C.UTF-8 printf "$regex")" --
One thing for the future, and one thing for the present.
- Do some languages we would add to po/ hierarchy in the future
possibly want to use these sequences as legitimate contents?
I mulled over that. And I think you're right. If a right-to-left
translation needs to refer to, say, a `git` invocation, the part that
shows the commandline surely would need to be guarded within directional
formatting code points. We currently only have translated messages that
read left-to-right, for example we lack Arabic and Hebrew translations.
Those would be likely to contain such code points on purpose.
I therefore added `:(exclude)*.po` to the command.
- Do we need ls-files?
For the latter, shouldn't the attribute-based pathspec work just
fine with "git grep"? i.e.
git grep -l -E -e $pattern -- ':(exclude,attr:binary)'
D'oh. You're right! I fixed it.
Ciao,
Dscho