[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#15192: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option
From: |
Corinna Vinschen |
Subject: |
bug#15192: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option |
Date: |
Mon, 26 Aug 2013 10:54:40 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Aug 25 12:49, Jim Meyering wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 5:43 AM, Corinna Vinschen <...> wrote:
> > But, here's a question: If the surrogate-pair test fails without the
> > patch due to the SEGV, and it also fails with the patch, just in a
> > different way, what's the idea of the testcase? In theory, shouldn't
> > there be two tests, one of them testing only for this very SEGV, and
> > another test testing how grep handles 4 byte UTF-8 values, since that's
> > another problem entirely?
>
> It's a trade-off. Split surrogate-pair testing into two very similar
> test scripts?
> Factor the similar parts into cfg.sh and use them from two test scripts?
> It didn't fee like it was justified in this case, since it's a
> cygwin-specific bug.
>
> If there's a short/reliable shell-level test for "is-cygwin", I suppose we
case $(uname -s) in
CYGWIN*)
...;;
*)
...;
esac
> could make the loop that iterates over grep options skip the currently-
> known-to-fail cases on Cygwin systems.
No, that's not right, IMHO. It's a matter how you define the test.
Only one part of the test is actually testing for the SEGV bug, is all
I'm saying. If you want to have a PASS in the testsuite if this works,
it should be a standalone test.
The second part of the test tests if grep handles 4 byte UTF-8 sequences
in regex'es correctly. It's a different test. If you define this one
as a target-agnostic test, it requires another test script.
If you define the whole script as *the* test for UTF-16 surrogates,
I suppose it should stay as is and the testcase should FAIL on Cygwin
as long as not all parts of grep grok UTF-16 surrogates.
It's probably just a different point of view, so, never mind.
Thanks,
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Maintainer
Red Hat
pgpa9yxT81izX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Corinna Vinschen, 2013/08/14
- Re: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Jim Meyering, 2013/08/16
- Re: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Corinna Vinschen, 2013/08/16
- Re: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Jim Meyering, 2013/08/18
- Re: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Corinna Vinschen, 2013/08/19
- Re: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Corinna Vinschen, 2013/08/19
- Re: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Paul Eggert, 2013/08/19
- Re: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Corinna Vinschen, 2013/08/20
- Re: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Jim Meyering, 2013/08/25
- bug#15192: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option,
Corinna Vinschen <=
- bug#15192: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Jim Meyering, 2013/08/27
- bug#15192: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Corinna Vinschen, 2013/08/27
- bug#15192: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Jim Meyering, 2013/08/31
Re: UTF-16 surrogate pair handling in grep -i option, Paolo Bonzini, 2013/08/20