4 ms·
Regarding the first point, I think it may be useful to have it need to explicitly be summoned (`@sedy` or whatever), rather than having it try to guess which co
by LukeShu 10y ago
Regarding the first point, I think it may be useful to have it need to explicitly be summoned (`@sedy` or whatever), rather than having it try to guess which comments are intended for it. That would also make it simpler to support other bits of sed syntax (like alternate delimiters), that would be hard to auto-recognize as sed commands.
- Kmaschta 10y agoI take note of your feedback, thanks!
- masklinn 10y agoIf you only support substitutions (the "s" command) maybe @sedy <separator><regexp><separator><replacement><separator><flags> that way you could e.g. @sedy |foo/bar|foo|g ?
- SEJeff 10y agoAlso sed supports any character separator ie: $ echo http://foobar.com/mai/path/meme.png | sed 's@/mai/path@/sweet/new/path@' http://foobar.com/sweet/new/path/meme.png Consider any separator
- Kmaschta 10y agoIt would be great! I have already noted this requested feature on my list.
- unholiness 10y agoA good thought! My point was orthogonal, though. I don't want a reviewer directly making committed changes to my code, period. Giving me control isn't about preventing inadvertent calls to sedy. It's about handling when someone suggests a substitution that I don't agree with, or want to reword. My mindset might be different from what Marmelab intends, but to me, code review is a conversation about the changes I'm responsible for making, not a google doc where anyone can change the content I'm about to push.