Skip to content

Comments

Add ability to provide regexp instead of just substrings for exclude#29

Open
berkes wants to merge 1 commit intoeparreno:masterfrom
berkes:master
Open

Add ability to provide regexp instead of just substrings for exclude#29
berkes wants to merge 1 commit intoeparreno:masterfrom
berkes:master

Conversation

@berkes
Copy link

@berkes berkes commented Nov 30, 2021

This is another go at #23,

Where we make it a little more flexible by allowing either the old
string version or a now newly introduced regxp.

This is fully backwards compatible.

This is another go at eparreno#23,

Where we make it a little more flexible by allowing either the old
string version or a now newly introduced regxp.

This is fully backwards compatible.
unless x.start_with?('/')
# Perhaps surprisingly, Regexp#inspect actually produces the more
# natural version of the string than #to_s.
as_s = x.is_a?(Regexp) ? x.inspect : x
Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not entirely sure about this. %r{stati+} turns into /stati+ so this always passes for Regexp. Which is probably not what we want. We could check for /\/stati in case of a regexp, but it becomes icky quite fast.

Do we want to check if it starts with a / for regexp at all?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant