[PATCH] revset: introduce the summary predicate

[Yuya Nishihara]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 13:59:36 +0100, Pierre-Yves David wrote:
> I'm not 100% sure of what Yuya actually has in mind but here is my 
> understanding of the situation and how we could move forward.
> 
> Currently:
> ----------
> 
>    desc(X) → X is customly matched as a case insensitive litteral,
> 
>    We have a "generic" pattern definition syntax used by various other 
> reveset (implemented in "stringmatcher")
> 
>      foo(X)
>        → X is matched as a case sensitive litteral
>      foo('literal:X')
>        → X is matched as a case sensitive literal (same as the above)
>      food('re:X')
>        → X is matched as a regular expression (case sensitive)
> 
> Proposal: (might be what yuya says)
> ---------
> 
> extend the string matcher to
> 
>    foo('literal:X')
>      → X is matched as a case sensitive literal
>    foo('icase-literal:X')
>      → X is matched as a case insensitive literal
>    food('re:X')
>      → X is matched as a regular expression (case sensitive)
> 
> Then, desc move to use string matcher (default to "icase-literal").
> 
> We do not need a 'icase-re:' spec, because one can easily achieve it 
> using 're:(?i)foo'

Exactly! IMO, the explicit "literal:" should be case-sensitive so my proposal.
And case-insensitive literal matcher can be build as a regexp object.

On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 22:23:33 -0500, Matt Harbison wrote:
> I don't do any work with locales, so this is probably a silly question.   
> Does the fact that the API ignores the current locale mean that there are  
> corner cases where it won't agree with the current method of  
> encoding.lowercase() everything and comparing?

Good point. unicode.lower() is locale aware so encoding.lower() would be the
same, which is slightly different from re.I. But I think that is unintentional.
e38846a79a23 only mentions encoding issue, which would be a sort of Shift_JIS
problems, not a locale-dependent case sensitivity.