On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> David Aguilar <davvid@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> @@ -44,19 +46,9 @@ valid_tool () {
>> }
>>
>> setup_tool () {
>> - case "$1" in
>> - vim*|gvim*)
>> - tool=vim
>> - ;;
>> - *)
>> - tool="$1"
>> - ;;
>> - esac
>
> This part was an eyesore every time I looked at mergetools scripts.
> Good riddance.
>
> Is there still other special case like this, or was this the last
> one?
>
> Thanks, both of you, for working on this.
I believe that was the last special case. :-) It should be easier
to auto-generate a list of tools for use in the documentation now.
That'll be the the next topic I look into.
I have a question. John mentioned that we can replace the use of
"$(..)" with $(..) in shell.
I have a trivial style patches to replace "$(..)" with $(..)
sitting uncommitted in my tree for mergetool--lib.
Grepping the rest of the tree shows that there are many
occurrences of the "$(..)" idiom in the shell code.
Is this a general rule that should be in CodingStyle,
or is it better left as-is? Are there cases where DQ should
be used around $(..)? My understanding is "no", but I don't
know whether that is correct.
Doing the documentation stuff is more important IMO so I probably
shouldn't let myself get too distracted by it, though I am curious.
--
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html