Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Jun 16 2007 22:42, Andy Whitcroft wrote: >> @@ -180,12 +182,17 @@ sub ctx_block_get { >> sub ctx_block_outer { >> my ($linenr, $remain) = @_; >> >> - return ctx_block_get($linenr, $remain, 1); >> + return ctx_block_get($linenr, $remain, 1, '\{', '\}'); > > '\\{'.
I want the string to be \{ ... '\}' gives me that: $ perl $q = '\}'; print "$q\n"; \} > Or, if it works, directly use > return &ctx_block_get($linenr, $remain, 1, qr/\{/, qr/\}/); > >> +sub ctx_statement { >> + my ($linenr, $remain) = @_; >> + >> + return ctx_block_get($linenr, $remain, 0, '\(', '\)'); > > ^^ > >> + my $ident = '[A-Za-z\d_]+'; > > Oh yes, use the qr operator here. (qr{}, qr//, choose anything like you > would do with m//) Well I want a combination of variable expanded and not expanded. I think there will be a general cleanup to some standard quoting for the RE's as there are hundreds, and about 7 different quote styles right now. > >> + my $storage = '(?:extern|static)'; >> + my $sparse = '(?:__user|__kernel|__force|__iomem)'; >> + my $type = '(?:unsigned\s+)?' . >> + '(?:void|char|short|int|long|unsigned|float|double|' . >> + 'long\s+long|' . >> + "struct\\s+${ident}|" . >> + "union\\s+${ident}|" . >> + "${ident}_t)" . >> + "(?:\\s+$sparse)*" . >> + '(?:\s*\*+)?'; >> + my $attribute = '(?:__read_mostly|__init|__initdata)'; >> + >> + my $Ident = $ident; >> + my $Type = $type; >> + my $Storage = $storage; >> + my $Declare = "(?:$storage\\s+)?$type"; >> + my $Attribute = $attribute; >> + > >> #trailing whitespace >> - if ($line=~/\+.*\S\s+$/) { >> + if ($line=~/^\+.*\S\s+$/) { > if ($line =~ /^\+.*\S\s+$/) { >> my $herevet = "$here\n" . cat_vet($line) . "\n\n"; >> print "trailing whitespace\n"; >> print "$herevet"; >> @@ -392,17 +420,20 @@ sub process { >> # >> next if ($in_comment); >> >> - # Remove comments from the line before processing. >> +# Remove comments from the line before processing. >> $line =~ s@/\*.*\*/@@g; >> $line =~ s@/\*.*@@; > > C being a wonderful language, has this nice pitfall for parsers > > foo = number /*pointer_to_int; Hmm really? Thats not how gcc seems to parse that, it seems to think its a comment. Which makes us safe, as the compiler will trip them up. $ cat test4.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { int _p = 10; int *p = &_p; int foo = 10 /*p; printf("foo=%d\n", foo); } $ cc -o test4 test4.c test4.c:6:15: error: unterminated comment test4.c: In function 'main': test4.c:6: error: expected ',' or ';' at end of input test4.c:6: error: expected declaration or statement at end of input >> $line =~ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/@@; >> >> - # >> - # Checks which may be anchored in the context. >> - # >> +# Standardise the strings and chars within the input to simplify matching. >> + $line = sanitise_line($line); >> + >> +# >> +# Checks which may be anchored in the context. >> +# >> >> - # Check for switch () and associated case and default >> - # statements should be at the same indent. >> +# Check for switch () and associated case and default >> +# statements should be at the same indent. >> if ($line=~/\bswitch\s*\(.*\)/) { > > Codingstyle warrants \bswitch\s+ :) Yep and we check for that. But here we are trying to catch a switch and case at differing levels, we want to catch that whether they got their spacing right or not. >> # * goes on variable not on type >> - my $type = '(?:char|short|int|long|unsigned|float|double|' . >> - 'struct\s+[A-Za-z\d_]+|' . >> - 'union\s+[A-Za-z\d_]+)'; >> - > > qr. (I don't know what it is good for - compare qr/xyz/ with 'xyz'..., > but there's a reason to its existence, so let's use it :-) Well I would tend to say use what works and is easy to understand. The semantics of '' and "" are well known, to change to qr{} I would have to go read the manual to know what it is going to do. That said, _if_ it did have the same semantics as m// then it may wel allow all of these to be expressed as qr{} as it would expand variables but treat \ as if we were in ''. So ... to the manual for me. -apw - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/