Open radare opened 9 years ago
Should we use ; as separator here (and also in /c )? On Dec 12, 2014 11:59 AM, "radare" notifications@github.com wrote:
pd~call,mov --> grep all CALL and MOVs
but if we do pd~call&mov it gets 0 results, because its not using & as separator. the correct syntax is: pd~&call,mov .. but this is probably not what the user would expect.
We should fix rcons to handle that syntax too
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/radare/radare2/issues/1830.
No. If u use ; u have to quote... And if u quote the grep will not be evaluated. So nope
On 12 Dec 2014, at 18:05, Jeffrey Crowell notifications@github.com wrote:
Should we use ; as separator here (and also in /c )? On Dec 12, 2014 11:59 AM, "radare" notifications@github.com wrote:
pd~call,mov --> grep all CALL and MOVs
but if we do pd~call&mov it gets 0 results, because its not using & as separator. the correct syntax is: pd~&call,mov .. but this is probably not what the user would expect.
We should fix rcons to handle that syntax too
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/radare/radare2/issues/1830.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
This issue has been moved from radareorg/radare2 to radareorg/ideas as we are trying to clean our backlog and this issue has probably been created a long while ago. This is an effort to help contributors understand what are the actionable items they can work on, prioritize issues better and help users find active/duplicated issues more easily. If this is not an enhancement/improvement/general idea but a bug, feel free to ask for re-transfer to main repo. Thanks for your understanding and contribution with this issue.
This issue has been moved from radareorg/radare2 to radareorg/ideas as we are trying to clean our backlog and this issue has probably been created a long while ago. This is an effort to help contributors understand what are the actionable items they can work on, prioritize issues better and help users find active/duplicated issues more easily. If this is not an enhancement/improvement/general idea but a bug, feel free to ask for re-transfer to main repo. Thanks for your understanding and contribution with this issue.
@ret2libc do you have any proposal for the grep expressions?
For the moment I wouldn't change it, because I would like to do it one time well and this would be better after switching to just one parser (hopefully newshell). Thinking about the future, I think cmd~word1&word2
makes sense.
pd~call,mov
--> grep all CALL and MOVsbut if we do
pd~call&mov
it gets 0 results, because its not using & as separator. the correct syntax is:pd~&call,mov
.. but this is probably not what the user would expect.We should fix rcons to handle that syntax too