Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] t4026: test "normal" color

From: Jeff King <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:00:48 -0500

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:53:56AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Jeff King <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> > If the user specifiers "normal" for a foreground color, this

Argh, s/specifiers/specifies/

> > We also check that color "-1" does the same thing. This is
> > not documented, but has worked forever, so let's make sure
> > we keep supporting it.
> 
> YLNTED, really?  I do not object to the conclusion, but I am
> mildly surprised ;-)

I was surprised by it, too, when writing the refactoring patch that
comes next in the series. :)

I was also surprised that we further check that "-2" is _not_ valid in
the tests.  I do not mind declaring everything negative to be the same
(either invalid, or "normal"), but I decided that there was really no
benefit to breaking compatibility in this case. And I suppose if you are
using 256-color mode, then "-1 255" is perhaps a natural way to write
it.

-Peff