Subject: Re: [GSoC][PATCH v3] Make options that expect object ids less chatty if id is invalid

From: Paul-Sebastian Ungureanu <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 21:44:32 +0200

Hello Junio,

Thank you for reviewing my code. I appreciate it. I made the changes
here [1].

On Mon, 2018-03-05 at 16:19 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Taking these together, I _think_ this patch is moving things in the
> right direction, in that it allows callers of parse_options_step()
> to tell "user knew what option s/he wanted, and sufficient error
> message has already be given" and "user gave us a nonsense option
> and would be helped by usage text" cases apart by introducing a new
> value PARSE_OPT_ERROR, but in order to be able to correctly give
> PARSE_OPT_ERROR back to the caller, parse_long_opt() and
> parse_short_opt() (possibly, but I didn't check) would need a bit of
> tweak to help their callers in this function.

I am not sure I got this right, but I believe this is already done.

- If an error occurs during value parsing in parse_short_opt or
parse_long_opt then -1 is returned and parse_option_step returns
PARSE_OPT_ERROR.

- If parse_short_opt and parse_long_opt encounter an unknown option
then -2 is returned and parse_option_step returns PARSE_OPT_UNKNOWN
(but only if PARSE_OPT_KEEP_UNKNOWN is not specified).

- If usage is shown by calling usage_with_options_internal then
PARSE_OPT_HELP is going to be forwarded and also returned by
parse_options_step.

What I also changed in the new patch [1] is to make parse_long_opt
return -3 when ambiguous option are found, in which case
parse_options_step will handle this return value by showing usage and
returning PARSE_OPT_HELP.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

[1] https://public-inbox.org/git/20180306193116.23876-1-ungureanupaulse
[email-masked]/T/#u

Best regards,
Paul Ungureanu