Fix overly greedy digits #2124
Merged
Fix overly greedy digits #2124
+4
−4
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This fixes several rules that were using greedy repetition operators. The problem with `(DIGIT|_)* DIGIT` is that the first repetition consumes all of the digits. I actually don't know exactly why the original rules were written in this particular way. I'm guessing they were intending to express that there must be at least one digit. However, just having `_`* should be sufficient.
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
traviscross
approved these changes
Dec 22, 2025
rustbot
removed
the
S-waiting-on-review
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This fixes several rules that were using greedy repetition operators. The problem with
(DIGIT|_)* DIGITis that the first repetition consumes all of the digits.I actually don't know exactly why the original rules were written in this particular way. I'm guessing they were intending to express that there must be at least one digit. However, just having
_* should be sufficient.