Re: [PATCH] csplit: new option --suppress-matched

[Pádraig Brady]

On 03/31/2013 02:19 AM, Assaf Gordon wrote:
> On 03/30/13 01:08, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> On 03/28/2013 10:10 PM, Assaf Gordon wrote:
>>>> Attached is a new option for csplit, suppress-matched, as been mentioned 
>>>> few times before (e.g. 
>>>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/coreutils/2013-02/msg00170.html ).
>>>>
>> The awkward case here is with integer boundaries and offsets.
> 
> <...>
> 
>> # Adding in the offset, we currently consider the
>> # offset line as the one to suppress, rather than the matched pattern.
> 
> This was exactly my original understanding of "matched" - not just "the line 
> that matched the regular expression",
> but the line that matched the specified pattern (i.e. regexp+offset or 
> integer pattern) - and that's the line suppressed.
> 
>> This could be confusing, but at least it's consistent.
>> So more accurately what we're doing is suppressing the boundary line.
>>
>> So less confusingly and more accurately,
>> this option should probably be named/described as:
>>
>> --suppress-boundary
>>    Suppress the boundary line from the start of the second and subsequent 
>> splits.
> 
> I'm fine with whichever name you decide. I find "matched" more natural, and 
> not so confusing, but boundary is just as good.
> I do think the description is a bit cumbersome (the "from the start of the 
> second and subsequent splits" part) - it seems more confusing to me than with 
> just omitting it.
> It's probably one of those cases that a single example of input+output is 
> worth more than a whole paragraph of explanation...

OK I stayed with --suppress-matched
I've just added the extra "boundary" description to the texinfo explanation.

Note I've removed the -m short option since we try to avoid them for new stuff.
Also it gives us the flexibility in future to add a param to --suppress-matched
to suppress X lines before/around/after the matched line, which could also be 
useful.

Note I needed to fix array references in the perl test as follows:
-                push $new_ent, $cmp;
+                push @$new_ent, $cmp;

-            push $new_ent, $post;
+            push @$new_ent, $post;

-            push $new_ent, $pre;
+            push @$new_ent, $pre;

-            push $new_ent, $e;
+            push @$new_ent, $e;

Will push in a while...

thanks,
Pádraig.