[GRASS-dev] Re: [GRASS-user] g.xlist/g.xremove addons (C version of g.mlist/g.mremove)

[Huidae Cho]

On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 06:05:46PM +0100, Glynn Clements wrote:
> 
> Huidae Cho wrote:
> 
> > > I have added g.mlist and g.mremove to SVN trunk, along with
> > > G_set_ls_filter() and the configure checks for the regex functions.
> > > 
> > 
> > Do we really need to keep the old names (g.mlist/g.mremove) when we may
> > break backward compatibility in grass7?  The "m" used to stand for
> > "modified", but "extended" (g.xlist/g.xremove) would be more
> > appropriate.  Just my paranoia :-).
> 
> I thought that these were supposed to be replacements for g.mlist and
> g.mremove. AFIACT, they have the same options as the script versions,
> other than the use of extended REs versus basic REs for -r.

Yes, g.xlist/g.xremove were supposed to be replacements/improvements
for g.mlist/g.mremove, but with different names.

> 
> If we decide to keep the script versions as a fallback, those will be
> replaced with Python versions in 7.x, so they can be changed to use
> extended REs (the shell script uses sed, which only supports basic
> REs). Or we can make the C versions use basic REs for -r and add e.g. 
> -e for extended REs.

I didn't mean whether or not we need to keep the script versions; I
doubt the need for fallback versions.  What I suggest is to remove the
script versions (already done) and "rename" the C version of
g.mlist/g.mremove to g.xlist/g.xremove as its current name g."m"list
(modified g.list) is somewhat awkward compared to g."x"list (extended
g.list).

I don't think it's a good idea to have two flags for basic and extended
REs unless grass7 should keep backward compatibility.

Huidae