On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 11:21:06AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Taylor Blau <m...@ttaylorr.com> writes: > > > I think that this might be clear enough on its own, especially since > > this is the same as BSD grep on my machine. I think that part_s_ of a > > line indicates that behavior, but perhaps not. On GNU grep, this is: > > > > Print only the matched (non-empty) parts of a matching line, with each > > such part on a separate output line. > > Interesting. I wonder what "git grep -o '^'" would do ;-)
That invocation prints nothing, but on BSD grep it prints quite a few blank lines :-). I'm hesitant on sending a patch per the hunk of your reply below because of this. Should we mirror BSD grep's behavior exactly here? I suppose that we could somehow, but it seems like we might be doing too much to support what appears to me to be an odd use-case. > > I'm happy to pick either and re-send this patch (2/2) again, if it > > wouldn't be too much to juggle. Otherwise, I can re-roll to v4. > > Please do not re-send a different version of a patch with the same > v$n value. Either re-send, otherwise re-roll, will give us v4, not > v3. > > In any case, I find that the GNU phrasing is the most clear among > the ones I've seen in this thread so far. OK. I'm happy to re-send that patch with the GNU phrasing depending on what others think (and the above). I'll let this cook and collect some thoughts over the weekend. Thanks, Taylor
