From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
To: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com>,
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@univ-lyon1.fr>
Subject: Re: Can we clarify the purpose of `git diff -s`?
Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 13:10:55 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <645d3dbf785a5_26069229463@chronos.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877cte200m.fsf@osv.gnss.ru>
Sergey Organov wrote:
> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
> > Sergey Organov wrote:
> >
> >> I'd rather think about generic interface for setting/clearing
> >> (multiple) bits through CI than resorting to such convenience
> >> tricks. Once that is in place, one will be able to say "I need these
> >> bits only", "I need to turn these bit(s) on", and "I need to turn
> >> these bit(s) off" conveniently and universally in any part of Git CI
> >> where it's needed.
> >
> > It's possible to achieve both.
> >
> > Imagine your ideal explicit interface. In that interface the default
> > is no output, so you *have* to specify all the bits, for example:
> >
> > git show --patch
>
> No, that's not what I meant. There is no point in making "git show" to
> have no output by default, please see below.
>
> >
> > Or:
> >
> > git show --raw
> >
> > In this ideal interface it's clear what the user wants to do, because
> > it's explicit.
> >
> > git show --patch --raw --no-patch
> >
> > Agreed?
> >
> > My proposal achieves your ideal explicit interface, except when no
> > format is specified (e.g. `git show`), a default format is chosen for
> > the user, but that's *only* if the user hasn't specified any format.
>
> My point is that the default format should be selected as if it has been
> provided by existing options, rather than by some magic hidden in the
> code.
But why?
I don't see any benefit, only drawbacks.
> > If you explicitely specify the output format that you want, then the
> > default is irrelevant to you, thus you have your ideal explicit
> > interface.
>
> That's not what I had in mind, sorry. It'd rather be something like:
>
> --raw: set "raw" bit and clear all the rest
> --+raw set "raw" bit (== current --raw)
> ---raw clear "raw" bit (== --no-raw)
>
> In this model
>
> git show
>
> would be just an alias for
>
> git log -n1 --patch --cc
>
> and no support for a separate command would be need in the first place.
>
> git show --raw
>
> would then produce expected output that makes sense due to the common
> option processing rules, not because somebody had implemented some
> arbitrary "defaults" for the command.
But now you are at the mercy of those "arbitrary defaults".
Let's say those defaults change, and now the default output of `git show` is
`--stat`.
Now to generate the same output you have to do:
git show --raw
in one version of git, and:
git show --no-stat --patch --raw
in another.
This forces the user to know what is the default of every command.
Why force this mental burden?
If I want both patch and raw, then why not explicitely say so:
git show --patch --raw
And forget about the current defaults for that command.
--
Felipe Contreras
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-11 19:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-11 3:14 Can we clarify the purpose of `git diff -s`? Felipe Contreras
2023-05-11 11:59 ` Sergey Organov
2023-05-11 16:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-11 17:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-11 18:04 ` Sergey Organov
2023-05-11 18:27 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-11 18:36 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-11 18:17 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-11 17:41 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-11 18:31 ` Sergey Organov
2023-05-11 19:10 ` Felipe Contreras [this message]
2023-05-11 19:32 ` Sergey Organov
2023-05-11 19:54 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-11 20:24 ` Sergey Organov
2023-05-11 20:59 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-11 22:49 ` Sergey Organov
2023-05-11 23:28 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-12 8:40 ` Sergey Organov
2023-05-12 19:19 ` Felipe Contreras
[not found] ` <5bb24e0208dd4a8ca5f6697d578f3ae0@SAMBXP02.univ-lyon1.fr>
2023-05-12 8:15 ` Matthieu Moy
2023-05-12 17:03 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-12 18:21 ` Sergey Organov
2023-05-12 19:21 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-12 19:34 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-12 20:28 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-12 20:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-12 21:01 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-12 21:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-12 21:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-12 23:21 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-12 21:41 ` Sergey Organov
2023-05-12 22:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-12 22:47 ` Sergey Organov
2023-05-12 23:07 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-13 14:58 ` Philip Oakley
2023-05-13 17:45 ` Sergey Organov
2023-05-12 19:47 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-12 19:34 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-12 19:17 ` Felipe Contreras
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=645d3dbf785a5_26069229463@chronos.notmuch \
--to=felipe.contreras@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthieu.moy@univ-lyon1.fr \
--cc=sorganov@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).