On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:13:12AM +0530, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> > Does it make more sense to replace this strbuf_addstr_without_crud()
> > setup with something more intelligent (i.e. checking for matching crud
> > on either end, like ^[$crudchars].*\1$? We already check for matched <>.
>
> Sounds like something easy enough to implement. There are two types of
> characters that crud() removes: there are the ones which _should_ appear
> on both the start and end (', ", <, >), and the ones which don't
> necessarily have to (., ,, :, ;, \).
>
> So we'd need to handle two cases. For the former type, remove a
> character both at the start and at the end. For the latter, remove only
> where they appear.
If we go down this route, then someone might want to write ő as o" or
ű as u", which still supposed to be used in pairs, but what if someone
wants to write ä as a:, ö as o:, ü as u:, ç as "c,", ş as "s,", etc.
What I wonder is whether we really have to remove crud from the user
name if it comes from the configuration.
