From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id 0GLQAX7jVmHJKAEAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:31:26 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id LOsWOX3jVmEHSgAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 01 Oct 2021 10:31:25 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 217361656A for ; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 12:31:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:60878 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mWFp6-0008QT-7S for larch@yhetil.org; Fri, 01 Oct 2021 06:31:24 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48010) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mWFnm-0008Pz-9h for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Oct 2021 06:30:02 -0400 Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]:36799) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mWFnk-0003tw-3y for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Oct 2021 06:30:02 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:Date; bh=Yb7nzSOeSp0TjhXb1fkU4BZG+BD2TSkN8PDfN4TYPZU=; b=DgS+X2mDLX4TJTRC2WM6wuXED66xd7Y4GJIhyzjM0fCXSCAIhBfu1ucSqs3z0X4Pk9z7p6YFrbpYwGsA2hYXXwfqRbP2f9hPmMW5EKLSEKGlg706yAiAhfu4cqKM3CQyYFLT2JFKOSpikyxmI6DkHkfTDihSJivzX6vnQkHDt6oVIL5tVowDn4FAeT2fkbh5UhJjuL2SuQ/jAm81JABcli/Dncq0bwxWlH9Wz37AdhwO+ja3Mzll7Ifq5xhYcjEylJgiOtTDTyK4mlo4echmYGVF1ePLPFJ94I9DHWi5undK3x+PrN0BVkOpSZFMAuwuVze/IEcxSHtI5ykiG0hpQg==; Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1mWFnh-00071e-Nh for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:29:57 +0200 Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2021 12:29:57 +0200 To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Accept more :tangle-mode specification forms Message-ID: <20211001102957.GF16352@tuxteam.de> References: <875yuh9b3t.fsf@gmail.com> <87a6jtjj20.fsf@gmail.com> <87ilyh5aci.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0hHDr/TIsw4o3iPK" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87ilyh5aci.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) From: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1633084285; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=Yb7nzSOeSp0TjhXb1fkU4BZG+BD2TSkN8PDfN4TYPZU=; b=RdPF5ZfNyySHOlxRU49Gxzqu8QW73ViuCWrEQ1FtDreRox02Nqn+nUOoPPZ/EYhWeQbA7w BH9cc0gmGtTnPdl1LFPrENpxzQiqFNOH1mX13CvGW4wF1yTOq8Vm9/2/J3fxMZX9Qs1kBE 6OYP+9+NY2IkaSlkzlGUiVLU5a0+9DTYgP7ncRmnSx371TFAshG3covHtUeD0X7z4H6B3C y50vOZuuWF15M8pFPWkoxOOdyd+rSCJK2Zme/Eg+nt1KSj8ym4k44/NEmSzyrWO8w+NM3u taCYpxpN4yolwZ4XRVGB4XpIrSEKv+ATq0rE7xmouC5eocSXZa61DFzAlXgJww== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1633084285; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=uJjl3J3sltDcKMyJvXPc2edpdlSsCOv/q9v8AEWEzBQqxKuXOPscoiUGvX8oCuBYxGAS7n COczUCQqpNoDyEKPV2w9VeTNDP8ruca0yrORoa3/lLRw+S7uXbnKggTUTVDWRCIT0mJuuG 6RwJtiH/xVvzZ9E1RKhvJmPhut40OqaTAVg5cUQVPOaKO9dX0NYGIllAcN58WoUIW8dMuP 2coRaVS5vGnsKcdU9QmNRiNpINSCtFtrAScK6OvxrRLgxNvORrFIWGBzJFARF45/030Jlf bGFknmy2SzBF/+rKyzihg2CQAGdtE26x82uH5eoTkwWKHY4cQrlicc9Y3F5f/A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=tuxteam.de header.s=mail header.b=DgS+X2mD; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -3.20 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=tuxteam.de header.s=mail header.b=DgS+X2mD; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 217361656A X-Spam-Score: -3.20 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: JeRVqrXUWX3I --0hHDr/TIsw4o3iPK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 11:05:17AM +0100, Eric S Fraga wrote: [...] > > I would also tend to only support something like "#o755" and forbid > > "755" as well as "0755", just to be more explicit and to avoid > > misinterpretation. >=20 > Here I disagree; again, in the manual, the notation used, as an example, > is 0755. I see no need for the #o syntax personally. This is > especially true if we don't allow integer (i.e. base 10) values. =20 Chiming in, I might be the culprit (in this thread) for the #o755 idea: I proposed it only because I was seeing that the argument was being interpreted as (a decimal representation of) an int, and thought it to be a good idea to stay compatible to Elisp notation. Since then, the movement was rather towards consistency with the shell and coreutils (which also makes sense, perhaps more [1]). I wouldn't mix both :) Cheers [1] If you get over the wart that there is a little embedded domain specific language in the arg of this one specific keyword. I can also understand Tom Gillespie's hesitations, since he's trying to formalise the grammar. - t --0hHDr/TIsw4o3iPK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAmFW4yUACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYRlwCfRMyDlyrUHfVsk7ERGJgQCs81 /dEAniNJkJ6iydSSdiV2E1Aj8ovQkLtx =cJEr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0hHDr/TIsw4o3iPK--