Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] blame: accept multiple -L ranges

From: Thomas Rast <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 12:39:40 +0200

Eric Sunshine <[email-masked]> writes:

> The proposal currently is only for "-L /RE/,whatever" to behave in a
> relative fashion, beginning the search at the end of the last range
> specified via -L (or line 1 if there is no previous -L).
>
> Would it also make sense to support "-L +N,whatever" as relative to
> the end of the last range specified via -L (or 1 if none).

Sounds reasonable.

I'm still not sure I am super-happy with /RE/ always being relative,
though I see Junio's problem space as something worth solving.  How does
it interact with -L:RE?  Do you now have to know in what order the
functions appear in the source to correctly specify -L:foo -L:bar or
similarly, -L/foo/,/^}/ -L/bar/,/^}/?  What if we supported +/RE/ as the
relative version?

-- 
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch