[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: when options conflict
From: |
Bob Proulx |
Subject: |
Re: when options conflict |
Date: |
Sun, 21 May 2006 20:06:36 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
Tony Abou-Assaleh wrote:
> > > -- Aborting in error for -G/-F/-E/-P,
> >
> > Definitely. Otherwise someone might think that something
> > like 'grep -E -e extendedpattern -P -e perlpattern' would work.
>
> It would be awesome if one could do that! This should go into feature
> requests.
How often would syntax like that really be used? Sure it would be
cool. But I think people wanting pcre patterns would simply want them
all of the time. Is there really enough need to match different
styles of regular expressions to warrent the work to put that into the
code? I doubt it would be worth it in actual usage.
Bob
- Re: when options conflict, (continued)
- Re: when options conflict, Paul Eggert, 2006/05/22
- Re: when options conflict, Benno Schulenberg, 2006/05/22
- Re: when options conflict, Paul Eggert, 2006/05/23
- Re: when options conflict, Benno Schulenberg, 2006/05/23
- Re: when options conflict, Julian Foad, 2006/05/25
- Re: when options conflict, Tony Abou-Assaleh, 2006/05/26
- Re: when options conflict, Tony Abou-Assaleh, 2006/05/22
- Re: when options conflict, Paul Eggert, 2006/05/23
- Re: when options conflict, Tony Abou-Assaleh, 2006/05/23
Re: when options conflict, Tony Abou-Assaleh, 2006/05/20
- Re: when options conflict,
Bob Proulx <=