lge
commented
3 years ago I think that is a list of patterns to be processed only in "compare"
mode, -o,
but not processed in normal check/update/whatever modes, unless also listed
as include/exclude statements.
Whether that is useful for anything, or even fully implemented... I don't
know.
On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 at 08:14, ggs67 @.***> wrote:
What is the undocumented (hoping I was not blind) "compare" statement in the config file for ?
Some background info:
After I did run out of time in my attempt to submit some changes for csync2 I decided to restart from scratch, resetting my fork and started cleaning up the parser/scanner before implementing new features.
For this I did switch from yacc to requiring bison (i.e. also running bison in native mode, not yacc compatible mode). This step is required by some changes I introduce but seemed also trivial as the original file uses the non-posix %expect statement. However my clean-up of the parser also includes changing the one step recursions to two steps. This removes the requirement for empty rules which has two positive effects : it disallows useless (and probably bogus) empty statements and in the same way removes the shift/reduce errors and thus does not require the %expect anymore
In my progress through the parser I am now on the "compare " and I think there is a bug in the parser or I alternatively I do not understand the use of the command. The comp_list rule parses to "incl_list TK_STRING" , while I guess this should be comp_list ? This seems top be confirmed by the code as there is no way for the code to distinguish between include patterns from the compare statement or a previous include statement.
Orgiginal rule:
comp_list: / empty / | incl_list TK_STRING { add_patt(2, on_cygwin_lowercase($2)); } ;
I guess it should be comp_list and I will change to:
comp_list: comp | comp_list comp ;
comp : TK_STRING { add_patt(2, on_cygwin_lowercase($1)); } ;
Still would be interested to know the use case of this statement.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/LINBIT/csync2/issues/35, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAGANXW6MKEOKX3NFJGDUDLTY6ZL7ANCNFSM5AZKUSSA .
What is the undocumented (hoping I was not blind) "compare" statement in the config file for ?
Some background info:
After I did run out of time in my attempt to submit some changes for csync2 I decided to restart from scratch, resetting my fork and started cleaning up the parser/scanner before implementing new features.
For this I did switch from yacc to requiring bison (i.e. also running bison in native mode, not yacc compatible mode). This step is required by some changes I introduce but seemed also trivial as the original file uses the non-posix %expect statement. However my clean-up of the parser also includes changing the one step recursions to two steps. This removes the requirement for empty rules which has two positive effects : it disallows useless (and probably bogus) empty statements and in the same way removes the shift/reduce errors and thus does not require the %expect anymore
In my progress through the parser I am now on the "compare " and I think there is a bug in the parser or I alternatively I do not understand the use of the command. The comp_list rule parses to "incl_list TK_STRING" , while I guess this should be comp_list ? This seems top be confirmed by the code as there is no way for the code to distinguish between include patterns from the compare statement or a previous include statement.
Orgiginal rule:
I guess it should be comp_list and I will change to:
Still would be interested to know the use case of this statement.