On 04/02/2013 04:57 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On 04/01/2013 06:56 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>> Because the primary use case of this option is to implement end-user
>>>> input validation, I think it would be helpful to clarify use of the
>>>> peeler here. Perhaps
>>>> ...
>>>
>>> A "SQUASH???" patch on top of your original is queued on 'pu',
>>> together with the earlier "^{object}" peeler patch. Comments,
>>> improvements, etc. would be nice.
>>
>> Yes, your version is better. I would make one change, though. In your
>>
>> + Make sure the single given parameter can be turned into a
>> + raw 20-byte SHA-1 that can be used to access the object
>> + database, and emit it to the standard output. If it can't,
>> + error out.
>>
>> it could be made clearer that exactly one parameter should be provided.
>> Maybe
>>
>> + Verify that exactly one parameter is provided, and that it
>
> That is probably better (I was hoping "the single" would mean the
> same to the reader, though). Thanks.
>
>> + can be turned into a raw 20-byte SHA-1 that can be used to
>> + access the object database. If so, emit the SHA-1 to the
>> + standard output; otherwise, error out.
>>
>> But this makes it sound a little like the "raw 20-byte SHA-1" will be
>> output to stdout,...
>
> I did consider that point, wrote "and outputs 40-hex" in my earlier
> draft, and then rejected it because it was even more misleading.
> The output follows the usual rules for "rev" parameters, e.g.
>
> git rev-parse --short --verify HEAD
> git rev-parse --symbolic --verify v1.8.2^{tree}
>
> and "--verify" does not mean 40-hex output. That is why I left it
> vague as "emit it".
>
> I agree that the wording incorrectly hints that you may be able to
> get 20-byte raw output. I didn't find a satisfactory phrasing.
It's the explicit mention of "raw 20-byte" that puts the reader in mind
of 20-byte binary data. I think any version that omitted that phrase
would let the reader make the assumption that the SHA-1s are expressed
as 40-byte hex numbers just they are everywhere else in the command-line
interface.
But I'm OK with any of the variations that we have discussed.
Michael
--
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/
--
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