From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 717D6C77B7C for ; Thu, 11 May 2023 19:54:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239450AbjEKTy6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 May 2023 15:54:58 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46992 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238502AbjEKTy4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 May 2023 15:54:56 -0400 Received: from mail-oa1-x35.google.com (mail-oa1-x35.google.com [IPv6:2001:4860:4864:20::35]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8D22FF for ; Thu, 11 May 2023 12:54:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oa1-x35.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-1960e7fe45dso2633150fac.0 for ; Thu, 11 May 2023 12:54:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1683834893; x=1686426893; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:references :in-reply-to:message-id:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=kVSmdsVPW4zIq3w2Tl/NdP7MAphTz/6S3X31B7wgbYM=; b=F5X/BlKs3n+DgvQEcG2wKybHqv+3tRwfEyZSRcDnMIsTfM5GpMhKJipDPM5iD5jKh/ mApyqxmwASW9fp8eixBHwBl9+22WdOOyliF73ltwe/KjbyaPVzliLlInbmiDv9NcJC2H 28w/gcLBANykfxwdwRazCixSxS7OHf2tVEYzgR1H4tJuSxubf/6RoZeBBCIcSE/ACX3v i8QFo0INdGypr4etZI9R1X4bjEEES7bGWx82LOd+cnWh5Ug5WwELzRoIo7cISFba5nVx on239Jzrh6wzxXhj4kCdy4PiqOyvNEaxwr3KZfKSRIgm8jxd5mIRstrSwWl28Z38Fgzz m/0Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1683834893; x=1686426893; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:references :in-reply-to:message-id:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=kVSmdsVPW4zIq3w2Tl/NdP7MAphTz/6S3X31B7wgbYM=; b=ZT1+HX0EB6gTMdK7QmVLHJFMogW0b0P+eM+XfcePDLcLhWvk6oYgN4B1ZBTU0RPIle eexcidjMfR/wgMMon0Pft+IQiTwuS1yhdlhomNW82tRjTcmVHltIiVekzqXqbO9NAYSR 2k8tuDHFHxLOoT6ajjHRZQkxV5/9PlnYCmY1Fw4FGxTDP4IrjW4yONio9dDu6PbD4tye C299yzMqdxxTCMnY+jpwwOoZtFLgNeTrJZexMQJn7UU7axpdzLAvnxfi61Y7inO+QM7j 6kT61HwP5wQm9v/4IILe2PdJb6lq2Ap3R2Hwtf9eF1kZK2b0QdUcOFRKsi+3ydt12lKD WxCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDzpigulGdc3Wi9dMYaIt4PMECr4DS8s8Xpwr0EnYFcD8ro+bmoq DBmaWKDouxrvi9jLraC9UEc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6sCYFbAuvEcCuVvwqi6Rn5O2Q3737mghv9Ya30j6yfPHpB1/llKVxCDiOpRKlVDuRzKG5GTg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:6298:b0:394:811:4978 with SMTP id du24-20020a056808629800b0039408114978mr5028750oib.48.1683834893481; Thu, 11 May 2023 12:54:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2806:2f0:4000:e8a3:4ae7:daff:fe31:3285]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v1-20020a4ac901000000b0054c9382b871sm7491817ooq.12.2023.05.11.12.54.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 11 May 2023 12:54:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 13:54:51 -0600 From: Felipe Contreras To: Sergey Organov , Felipe Contreras Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Matthieu Moy Message-ID: <645d480be344d_260ff5294c@chronos.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <87wn1ezms9.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> References: <645c5da0981c1_16961a29455@chronos.notmuch> <871qjn2i63.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <645d28e112294_26011a294b2@chronos.notmuch> <877cte200m.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <645d3dbf785a5_26069229463@chronos.notmuch> <87wn1ezms9.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> Subject: Re: Can we clarify the purpose of `git diff -s`? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Sergey Organov wrote: > Felipe Contreras writes: > > > Sergey Organov wrote: > >> Felipe Contreras 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". > > No, see below. > > > > > 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. > > No: --raw in my model clears all the flags but --raw, so > > git show --raw > > will produce exactly the same result: raw output only. But that {--,--+,---} notion doesn't exist, and I think it's safe to say it will never exist. So, could we limit or solution-space to those solutions that could have the potential to be merged? What you suggest could be easily achieved with: git show --silent --raw But because no other format is explicitely specified, following my notion of defaults, that's the same as: git show --raw `---raw` can easily be achieved with `--no-raw`. The only thing that's missing is `--+raw`, but I don't see how this: git show --+raw Is more valuable than: git show --patch --raw If you know the default of `git show` is `--patch`, and you want to add `--raw`, then you can easily write the latter. Doesn't this approach achieve everything you want to do? Albeit with a different syntax. -- Felipe Contreras