suggestion for slightly cleaner regexps #237
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
I suggested this change while reviewing a cucumber-using project: - Given /^"([^"]*)" instance's provider is not accessible$/ do |arg1| + Given /^"(.*?)" instance's provider is not accessible$/ do |arg1| since the use of non-greedy .*? is equivalent and more readable. Then I learned that these were based on suggestions from cucumber, so now I'm suggesting the improvement here.
|
Looks good. Note to self - make generated regexp for numbers use Worthwhile adding |
mattwynne
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 4, 2012
suggestion for slightly cleaner regexps
|
This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I suggested this change while reviewing a cucumber-using project:
since the use of non-greedy .? is equivalent and more readable.
Then I learned that these were based on suggestions from cucumber,
so now I'm suggesting the improvement here.