On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Chong Yidong
<address@hidden> wrote:
> OK. I've not looked at it in all that great detail, and haven't tried
> it out yet. I'm not actually a Java hacker.
>
> How confident are you that your proposed regexp won't spuriously match
> things with "less than" or "greater than" tokens? Or, if it will, would
> these matches be rare enough that we needn't worry too much?
>
> Is there any chance you could send me a test file showing a typical
> generic construct that the new regexp would match, and possibly
> constructs with "less/greater than" which it "doesn't quite" match?
By the way, it might be good to accumulate a test suite for CC mode,
along the lines of etc/compilation.txt. I don't know if you already
have something like that; if so, we can put it in the new test/
directory.
(We should probably move etc/compilation into test/ also.)