From: Jeff King <peff@peff•net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
Cc: "Øystein Walle" <oystwa@gmail•com>, git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] commit: inform pre-commit if --amend is used
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:03:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141125050331.GB20805@peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqtx1nub9e.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 08:58:37PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@peff•net> writes:
>
> > 1. It is a bit more obvious when debugging or dumping arguments (e.g.,
> > via GIT_TRACE), especially if new options are added after the
> > first.
> >
> > 2. It makes it easier for a script to work on old and new versions of
> > git. It sees either "amend" or "noamend" for the two obvious cases,
> > and if it sees no argument, then it knows that it does not know
> > either way (it is running on an old version of git).
> >
> > Technically one can tell the difference in shell between an empty
> > string and a missing argument, but it is sufficiently subtle that I
> > think "noamend" is a better route.
>
> If we ever add more info, would we want to keep piling on new
> arguments, though? Wouldn't it a viable option to use "amend" vs
> not giving anything (not even an empty string), so that normal case
> there won't be no parameter?
Then when you add new arguments, the hook has to search through the
parameters looking for one that matches, rather than just checking "$1"
for "amend" (and "$2" for the new option, and so on). As long as the set
of options remains relatively small, I think that is preferable.
We could also just pass them through the environment, which gives nice
named parameters.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-25 5:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-24 11:21 [PATCH] commit: inform pre-commit if --amend is used Øystein Walle
2014-11-24 23:14 ` Eric Sunshine
2014-11-25 3:44 ` Jeff King
2014-11-25 4:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-11-25 5:03 ` Jeff King [this message]
2014-11-27 14:40 ` Mark Levedahl
2014-11-28 5:18 ` Jeff King
2014-11-28 15:49 ` Mark Levedahl
2014-12-01 0:56 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20141125050331.GB20805@peff.net \
--to=peff@peff$(echo .)net \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=oystwa@gmail$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox