Add option to skip ansi escape codes

[phaer]

This allows users to ignore ansi escape codes, such as terminal colors and would therefore close #25.

As you've noticed, i needed to add the new parameter skip_ansi_escape_codes in quite a few places. Maybe it would be a good idea to introduce an Options struct for timeout and skip_ansi_escape_codes, with default values? I could do that, but wanted to keep this PR focused.

I've considered using strip_ansi_escapes, mentioned in the issue. But that uses VTE which uses a state machine to interpret the escape codes.

But as we are not interested in interpreting them, just skipping them and ansi escape codes are just the byte 27 inserted in a string, followed by "[", zero or more numbers separated by ";" and ending with a letter;
We optionally just skip those in our non-blocking reader in order to efficently ignore them during matching without having to traverse the whole buffer a second time. A minimal test case is also added

[petreeftime]

Adding an optional Options or Config generated by a ConfigBuilder would be ideal, so that we don't have to change the API for every field.

I would also add a spawn_with_config function instead of modifing the API of the current spawn function.

[phaer]

Thanks for the quick review @petreeftime. I've added Options, which makes the diff much more readable.

The spawn* API stays the same, but gains spawn_with_options. Just saw that the test failed again, same failure as in my other PR - but I can't reproduce locally with cargo test yet 🤔

[matthiasbeyer]

Yeah that CI failure is attempted to be fixed in #101 - it is some kind of sporadic failure which we did not find yet.

[phaer]

Ah, thanks for the explanation! So I'll just leave this PR-as is, as bors should re-run the checks before an eventual merge anyways, right?

LMK if there's something left to improve or fix :)

[matthiasbeyer]

Yeah I think this is fine... we'll ping you if there's anything to fix up, I guess.

[souze]

Looks good to me, nice work!

[phaer]

@matthiasbeyer Friendly ping :) could we merge this?

[matthiasbeyer]

Yes we could, but we're getting the sporadic CI error again and for whatever reason I cannot re-run the CI.

Could you @phaer please rebase this PR to latest master, or, if it is based on latest master: git commit --amend --no-edit && git push <your github remote> <this branch> --force please? This way CI should re-run and I hope we do not get the error this time.

[matthiasbeyer]

This CI failure is really annoying 😠

[phaer]

@matthiasbeyer Just remembered this, rebased and we've got a passing CI now 🥳

[matthiasbeyer]

bors merge=souze

[bors]

Build succeeded!

The publicly hosted instance of bors-ng is deprecated and will go away soon.

If you want to self-host your own instance, instructions are here.
For more help, visit the forum.

If you want to switch to GitHub's built-in merge queue, visit their help page.

• CI