Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] color: add support for 12-bit RGB colors

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 10:31:12 -0700

Jeff King <[email-masked]> writes:

> On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 06:48:49PM +0200, Beat Bolli wrote:
>
>> -test_expect_success '24-bit colors' '
>> -	color "#ff00ff black" "[38;2;255;0;255;40m"
>> +test_expect_success 'RGB colors' '
>> +	color "#ff00ff #0f0" "[38;2;255;0;255;48;2;0;255;0m"
>>  '
>
> Heh, I would still think of it as a shorthand for 24-bit color, but I
> guess you could argue it is now 12-bit color. :)
>
> (Only observing, I think the new name is fine).
>
>>  test_expect_success '"default" foreground' '
>> @@ -146,7 +146,10 @@ test_expect_success 'non-hex character in RGB color' '
>>  	invalid_color "#12x456" &&
>>  	invalid_color "#123x56" &&
>>  	invalid_color "#1234x6" &&
>> -	invalid_color "#12345x"
>> +	invalid_color "#12345x" &&
>> +	invalid_color "#x23" &&
>> +	invalid_color "#1x3" &&
>> +	invalid_color "#12x"
>>  '
>
> This made me wonder what we'd do with "#1", "#12", "#1234", etc. Looking
> at the code change, I think we'd continue to reject them. I wonder if it
> is worth covering here.

Worth covering in this test, yes, but I am perfectly OK with leaving
it outside the series as a #leftoverbit clean-up.