v1.9.6

FIXED:
* More clear docs for bitmask
* Resolved potential issue for using PriorityAll in
  logging.logPrio.HasFlag.

.encoding.TODO/bit/docs.go

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+/*
+Package bit aims to provide feature parity with stdlib's [encoding/hex].
+
+It's a ludicrous tragedy that hex/base16, base32, base64 all have libraries for converting
+to/from string representations... but there's nothing for binary ('01010001' etc.) whatsoever.
+
+This package also provides some extra convenience functions and types in an attempt to provide
+an abstracted bit-level fidelity in Go. A [Bit] is a bool type, in which that underlying bool
+being false represents a 0 and that underlying bool being true represents a 1.
+
+Note that a [Bit] or arbitrary-length or non-octal-aligned [][Bit] may take up more bytes in memory
+than expected; a [Bit] will actually always occupy a single byte -- thus representing
+`00000000 00000000` as a [][Bit] or [16][Bit] will actually occupy *sixteen bytes* in memory,
+NOT 2 bytes (nor, obviously, [2][Byte])!
+It is recommended instead to use a [Bits] instead of a [Bit] slice or array, as it will try to properly align to the
+smallest memory allocation possible (at the cost of a few extra CPU cycles on adding/removing one or more [Bit]).
+It will properly retain any appended, prepended, leading, or trailing bits that do not currently align to a byte.
+*/
+package bit

.encoding.TODO/bit/funcs.go

@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+package bit
+
+// TODO: Provide analogues of encoding/hex, encoding/base64, etc. functions etc.
+
+/*
+	TODO: Also provide interfaces for the following:
+
+	* https://pkg.go.dev/encoding#BinaryAppender
+	* https://pkg.go.dev/encoding#BinaryMarshaler
+	* https://pkg.go.dev/encoding#BinaryUnmarshaler
+	* https://pkg.go.dev/encoding#TextAppender
+	* https://pkg.go.dev/encoding#TextMarshaler
+	* https://pkg.go.dev/encoding#TextUnmarshaler
+*/

.encoding.TODO/bit/types.go

@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+package bit
+
+type (
+	// Bit aims to provide a native-like type for a single bit (Golang operates on the smallest fidelity level of *byte*/uint8).
+	Bit bool
+
+	// Bits is an arbitrary length of bits.
+	Bits struct {
+		/*
+			leading is a series of Bit that do not cleanly align to the beginning of Bits.b.
+			They will always be the bits at the *beginning* of the sequence.
+			len(Bits.leading) will *never* be more than 7;
+			it's converted into a byte, prepended to Bits.b, and cleared if it reaches that point.
+		*/
+		leading []Bit
+		// b is the condensed/memory-aligned alternative to an [][8]Bit (or []Bit, or [][]Bit, etc.).
+		b []byte
+		/*
+			remaining is a series of Bit that do not cleanly align to the end of Bits.b.
+			They will always be the bits at the *end* of the sequence.
+			len(Bits.remaining) will *never* be more than 7;
+			it's converted into a byte, appended to Bits.b, and cleared if it reaches that point.
+		*/
+		remaining []Bit
+		// fixedLen, if 0, represents a "slice". If >= 1, it represents an "array".
+		fixedLen uint
+	}
+
+	// Byte is this package's representation of a byte. It's primarily for convenience.
+	Byte byte
+
+	// Bytes is defined as a type for convenience single-call functions.
+	Bytes []Byte
+)

bitmask/bitmask.go

@@ -34,12 +34,56 @@ func NewMaskBitExplicit(value uint) (m *MaskBit) {
 	return
 }
 
-// HasFlag is true if m has MaskBit flag set/enabled.
+/*
+	HasFlag is true if m has MaskBit flag set/enabled.
+
+	THIS WILL RETURN FALSE FOR OR'd FLAGS.
+
+	For example:
+
+		flagA MaskBit = 0x01
+		flagB MaskBit = 0x02
+		flagComposite = flagA | flagB
+
+		m *MaskBit = NewMaskBitExplicit(uint(flagA))
+
+	m.HasFlag(flagComposite) will return false even though flagComposite is an OR
+	that contains flagA.
+	Use [MaskBit.IsOneOf] instead if you do not desire this behavior,
+	and instead want to test composite flag *membership*.
+	(MaskBit.IsOneOf will also return true for non-composite equality.)
+
+	To be more clear, if MaskBit flag is a composite MaskBit (e.g. flagComposite above),
+	HasFlag will only return true of ALL bits in flag are also set in MaskBit m.
+*/
 func (m *MaskBit) HasFlag(flag MaskBit) (r bool) {
 
 	var b MaskBit = *m
 
-	if b&flag != 0 {
+	if b&flag == flag {
+		r = true
+	}
+	return
+}
+
+/*
+	IsOneOf is like a "looser" form of [MaskBit.HasFlag]
+	in that it allows for testing composite membership.
+
+	See [MaskBit.HasFlag] for more information.
+
+	If composite is *not* an OR'd MaskBit (i.e.
+	it falls directly on a boundary -- 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, etc.),
+	then IsOneOf will behave exactly like HasFlag.
+
+	If m is a composite MaskBit (it usually is) and composite is ALSO a composite MaskBit,
+	IsOneOf will return true if ANY of the flags set in m is set in composite.
+*/
+func (m *MaskBit) IsOneOf(composite MaskBit) (r bool) {
+
+	var b MaskBit = *m
+
+	if b&composite != 0 {
 		r = true
 	}
 	return

bitmask/doc.go

@@ -1,9 +1,35 @@
 /*
 Package bitmask handles a flag-like opt/bitmask system.
 
-See https://yourbasic.org/golang/bitmask-flag-set-clear/ for more information.
+See https://yourbasic.org/golang/bitmask-flag-set-clear/ for basic information on what bitmasks are and why they're useful.
 
-To use this, set constants like thus:
+Specifically, in the case of Go, they allow you to essentially manage many, many, many "booleans" as part of a single value.
+
+A single bool value in Go takes up 8 bits/1 byte, unavoidably.
+
+However, a [bitmask.MaskBit] is backed by a uint which (depending on your platform) is either 32 bits/4 bytes or 64 bits/8 bytes.
+
+"But wait, that takes up more memory though!"
+
+Yep, but bitmasking lets you store a "boolean" AT EACH BIT - it operates on
+whether a bit in a byte/set of bytes at a given position is 0 or 1.
+
+Which means on 32-bit platforms, a [MaskBit] can have up to 4294967295 "booleans" in a single value (0 to (2^32)-1).
+
+On 64-bit platforms, a [MaskBit] can have up to 18446744073709551615 "booleans" in a single value (0 to (2^64)-1).
+
+If you tried to do that with Go bool values, that'd take up 4294967295 bytes (4 GiB)
+or 18446744073709551615 bytes (16 EiB - yes, that's [exbibytes]) of RAM for 32-bit/64-bit platforms respectively.
+
+"But that has to be so slow to unpack that!"
+
+Nope. It's not using compression or anything, the CPU is just comparing bit "A" vs. bit "B" 32/64 times. That's super easy work for a CPU.
+
+There's a reason Doom used bitmasking for the "dmflags" value in its server configs.
+
+# Usage
+
+To use this library, set constants like thus:
 
 	package main
 
@@ -42,12 +68,95 @@ But this would return false:
 
 	MyMask.HasFlag(OPT2)
 
+# Technical Caveats
+
+TARGETING
+
+When implementing, you should always set MyMask (from Usage section above) as the actual value.
+For example, if you are checking a permissions set for a user that has the value, say, 6
+
+	var userPerms uint = 6 // 0x0000000000000006
+
+and your library has the following permission bits defined:
+
+	const PermsNone bitmask.MaskBit = 0
+	const (
+		PermsList bitmask.MaskBit = 1 << iota // 1
+		PermsRead                             // 2
+		PermsWrite                            // 4
+		PermsExec                             // 8
+		PermsAdmin                            // 16
+	)
+
+And you want to see if the user has the PermsRead flag set, you would do:
+
+	userPermMask = bitmask.NewMaskBitExplicit(userPerms)
+	if userPermMask.HasFlag(PermsRead) {
+		// ...
+	}
+
+NOT:
+
+	userPermMask = bitmask.NewMaskBitExplicit(PermsRead)
+	// Nor:
+	// userPermMask = PermsRead
+	if userPermMask.HasFlag(userPerms) {
+		// ...
+	}
+
+This will be terribly, horribly wrong, cause incredibly unexpected results,
+and quite possibly cause massive security issues. Don't do it.
+
+COMPOSITES
+
+If you want to define a set of flags that are a combination of other flags,
+your inclination would be to bitwise-OR them together:
+
+	const (
+		flagA bitmask.MaskBit = 1 << iota // 1
+		flagB                             // 2
+	)
+
+	const (
+		flagAB bitmask.MaskBit = flagA | flagB // 3
+	)
+
+Which is fine and dandy. But if you then have:
+
+	var myMask *bitmask.MaskBit = bitmask.NewMaskBit()
+
+	myMask.AddFlag(flagA)
+
+You may expect this call to [MaskBit.HasFlag]:
+
+	myMask.HasFlag(flagAB)
+
+to be true, since flagA is "in" flagAB.
+It will return false - HasFlag does strict comparisons.
+It will only return true if you then ALSO do:
+
+	// This would require setting flagA first.
+	// The order of setting flagA/flagB doesn't matter,
+	// but you must have both set for HasFlag(flagAB) to return true.
+	myMask.AddFlag(flagB)
+
+or if you do:
+
+	// This can be done with or without additionally setting flagA.
+	myMask.AddFlag(flagAB)
+
+Instead, if you want to see if a mask has membership within a composite flag,
+you can use [MaskBit.IsOneOf].
+
+# Other Options
+
 If you need something with more flexibility (as always, at the cost of complexity),
 you may be interested in one of the following libraries:
 
-. github.com/alvaroloes/enumer
+	* [github.com/alvaroloes/enumer]
-. github.com/abice/go-enum
+	* [github.com/abice/go-enum]
-. github.com/jeffreyrichter/enum/enum
+	* [github.com/jeffreyrichter/enum/enum]
 
+[exbibytes]: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exbibyte
 */
 package bitmask

logging/TODO

@@ -4,6 +4,8 @@
 -- no native Go support (yet)?
 --- https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/773369
 
+- The log destinations for e.g. consts_nix.go et. al. probably should be unexported types.
+
 - add a `log/slog` logging.Logger?
 
 - Implement code line/func/etc. (only for debug?):

logging/consts_nix.go

@@ -23,8 +23,8 @@ const (
 // LogUndefined indicates an undefined Logger type.
 const LogUndefined bitmask.MaskBit = iota
 const (
-	// LogJournald flags a SystemDLogger Logger type.
+	// LogJournald flags a SystemDLogger Logger type. This will, for hopefully obvious reasons, only work on Linux systemd systems.
-	LogJournald = 1 << iota
+	LogJournald bitmask.MaskBit = 1 << iota
 	// LogSyslog flags a SyslogLogger Logger type.
 	LogSyslog
 	// LogFile flags a FileLogger Logger type.

logging/consts_windows.go

@@ -3,16 +3,14 @@ package logging
 import (
 	`os`
 	`path/filepath`
-
-	`r00t2.io/goutils/bitmask`
 )
 
 // Flags for logger configuration. These are used internally.
+// LogUndefined indicates an undefined Logger type.
+LogUndefined bitmask.MaskBit = 0
 const (
-	// LogUndefined indicates an undefined Logger type.
-	LogUndefined bitmask.MaskBit = 1 << iota
 	// LogWinLogger indicates a WinLogger Logger type (Event Log).
-	LogWinLogger
+	LogWinLogger bitmask.MaskBit= 1 << iota
 	// LogFile flags a FileLogger Logger type.
 	LogFile
 	// LogStdout flags a StdLogger Logger type.

logging/funcs_logprio.go

@@ -17,7 +17,9 @@ func (l *logPrio) HasFlag(prio logPrio) (hasFlag bool) {
 	m = bitmask.NewMaskBitExplicit(uint(*l))
 	p = bitmask.NewMaskBitExplicit(uint(prio))
 
-	hasFlag = m.HasFlag(*p)
+	// Use IsOneOf instead in case PriorityAll is passed for prio.
+	// hasFlag = m.HasFlag(*p)
+	hasFlag = m.IsOneOf(*p)
 
 	return
 }

logging/funcs_logwriter.go

@@ -40,6 +40,8 @@ func (l *logWriter) Write(b []byte) (n int, err error) {
 
 	s = string(b)
 
+	// Since this explicitly checks each priority level, there's no need for IsOneOf in case of PriorityAll.
+
 	if l.prio.HasFlag(PriorityEmergency) {
 		if err = l.backend.Emerg(s); err != nil {
 			mErr.AddError(err)

remap/funcs_remap.go

@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ func (r *ReMap) Map(b []byte, inclNoMatch, inclNoMatchStrict, mustMatch bool) (m
 	if len(matchBytes) == 0 || len(matchBytes) == 1 {
 		/*
 			no submatches whatsoever.
-			*technically* I don't think this condition can actually be reached.
+			*Technically* I don't think this condition can actually be reached.
 			This is more of a safe-return before we re-slice.
 		*/
 		matches = make(map[string][][]byte)
@@ -308,6 +308,13 @@ func (r *ReMap) MapString(s string, inclNoMatch, inclNoMatchStrict, mustMatch bo
 	var grpNm string
 	var names []string
 	var matchStr string
+	/*
+		A slice of indices or index pairs.
+		For each element `e` in idxChunks,
+		* if `e` is nil, no group match.
+		* if len(e) == 1, only a single character was matched.
+		* otherwise len(e) == 2, the start and end of the match.
+	*/
 	var idxChunks [][]int
 	var matchIndices []int
 	var chunkIndices []int // always 2 elements; start pos and end pos
@@ -317,7 +324,7 @@ func (r *ReMap) MapString(s string, inclNoMatch, inclNoMatchStrict, mustMatch bo
 		OK so this is a bit of a deviation.
 
 		It's not as straightforward as above, because there isn't an explicit way
-		like above to determine if a patterb was *matched as an empty string* vs.
+		like above to determine if a pattern was *matched as an empty string* vs.
 		*not matched*.
 
 		So instead do roundabout index-y things.
@@ -326,73 +333,111 @@ func (r *ReMap) MapString(s string, inclNoMatch, inclNoMatchStrict, mustMatch bo
 	if s == "" {
 		return
 	}
-	names = r.Regexp.SubexpNames()
+	/*
+		I'm not entirely sure how serious they are about "the slice should not be modified"...
+
+		DO NOT sort or dedupe `names`! If the same name for groups is duplicated,
+		it will be duplicated here in proper order and the ordering is tied to
+		the ordering of matchIndices.
+	*/
+	names = r.Regexp.SubexpNames()[:]
 	matchIndices = r.Regexp.FindStringSubmatchIndex(s)
 
 	if matchIndices == nil {
-		// s does not match pattern
+		// s does not match pattern at all.
 		if !mustMatch {
 			matches = make(map[string][]string)
 		}
 		return
 	}
 
-	if names == nil || len(names) == 0 || len(names) == 1 {
+	if names == nil || len(names) <= 1 {
 		/*
-			no named capture groups;
+			No named capture groups;
-			technically only the last condition would be the case.
+			technically only the last condition would be the case,
+			as (regexp.Regexp).SubexpNames() will ALWAYS at the LEAST
+			return a `[]string{""}`.
 		*/
 		if inclNoMatch {
 			matches = make(map[string][]string)
 		}
 		return
 	}
-	names = names[1:]
 
 	if len(matchIndices) == 0 || len(matchIndices) == 1 {
 		/*
-			no submatches whatsoever.
+			No (sub)matches whatsoever.
-			*technically* I don't think this condition can actually be reached.
+			*technically* I don't think this condition can actually be reached;
+			matchIndices should ALWAYS either be `nil` or len will be at LEAST 2,
+			and modulo 2 thereafter since they're PAIRS of indices...
+			Why they didn't just return a [][]int or [][2]int or something
+			instead of an []int, who knows.
+			But we're correcting that poor design.
 			This is more of a safe-return before we chunk the indices.
 		*/
 		matches = make(map[string][]string)
 		if inclNoMatch {
-			if len(names) >= 1 {
+			for _, grpNm = range names {
-				for _, grpNm = range names {
+				if grpNm != "" {
 					matches[grpNm] = nil
 				}
 			}
 		}
 		return
 	}
-	/*
-		The reslice starts at 2 because they're in pairs: []int{<start>, <end>, <start>, <end>, ...}
-		and the first *pair* is the entire pattern match.
-		Thus the len(matchIndices) == 2*len(names).
-		Keep in mind that since the first element of names is removed,
-		the first pair here is also removed.
-	*/
-	matchIndices = matchIndices[2:]
 
+	/*
+		A reslice of `matchIndices` could technically start at 2 (as long as `names` is sliced [1:])
+		because they're in pairs: []int{<start>, <end>, <start>, <end>, ...}
+		and the first pair is the entire pattern match (un-resliced names[0]).
+		Thus the len(matchIndices) == 2*len(names), *even* if you
+		Keep in mind that since the first element of names is removed,
+		the first pair here is skipped.
+		This provides a bit more consistent readability, though.
+	*/
 	idxChunks = make([][]int, len(names))
-	for startIdx = 0; startIdx < len(idxChunks); startIdx += 2 {
+	chunkIdx = 0
+	endIdx = 0
+	for startIdx = 0; endIdx < len(matchIndices); startIdx += 2 {
 		endIdx = startIdx + 2
+		// This technically should never happen.
+		if endIdx > len(matchIndices) {
+			endIdx = len(matchIndices)
+		}
+
+		chunkIndices = matchIndices[startIdx:endIdx]
+
+		if chunkIndices[0] == -1 || chunkIndices[1] == -1 {
+			// group did not match
+			chunkIndices = nil
+		} else {
+			if chunkIndices[0] == chunkIndices[1] {
+				chunkIndices = []int{chunkIndices[0]}
+			} else {
+				chunkIndices = matchIndices[startIdx:endIdx]
+			}
+		}
+		idxChunks[chunkIdx] = chunkIndices
+		chunkIdx++
+	}
+
+	// Now associate with names and pull the string sequence.
+	for chunkIdx, chunkIndices = range idxChunks {
 		grpNm = names[chunkIdx]
 		/*
 			Thankfully, it's actually a build error if a pattern specifies a named
 			capture group with an empty name.
 			So we don't need to worry about accounting for that,
-			and can just skip over grpNm == "" (which is an *unnamed* capture group).
+			and can just skip over grpNm == ""
+			(which is either an *unnamed* capture group
+			OR the first element in `names`, which is always
+			the entire match).
 		*/
 		if grpNm == "" {
 			continue
 		}
-		// This technically should never happen.
+
-		if endIdx > len(matchIndices) {
+		if chunkIndices == nil || len(chunkIndices) == 0 {
-			endIdx = len(matchIndices)
-		}
-		chunkIndices = matchIndices[startIdx:endIdx]
-		if chunkIndices[0] == -1 || chunkIndices[1] == -1 {
 			// group did not match
 			if !inclNoMatch {
 				continue
@@ -411,13 +456,19 @@ func (r *ReMap) MapString(s string, inclNoMatch, inclNoMatchStrict, mustMatch bo
 			continue
 		}
 
-		matchStr = s[chunkIndices[0]:chunkIndices[1]]
+		switch len(chunkIndices) {
+		case 1:
+			// Single character
+			matchStr = string(s[chunkIndices[0]])
+		case 2:
+			// Multiple characters
+			matchStr = s[chunkIndices[0]:chunkIndices[1]]
+		}
+
 		if _, ok = tmpMap[grpNm]; !ok {
 			tmpMap[grpNm] = make([]string, 0)
 		}
 		tmpMap[grpNm] = append(tmpMap[grpNm], matchStr)
-
-		chunkIdx++
 	}
 
 	// This *technically* should be completely handled above.