Re: [puzzled and solved] "shortlog" not quite understanding all "log" options

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 02:37:02PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> > I am slightly puzzled why parse_revision_opt does not just call
> > handle_revision_pseudo_opt. According to f6aca0dc4, it is because
> > pseudo-options need to be acted on in-order, as they affect things like
> > subsequent "--not" options, etc. But if we are using parse_options_step,
> > shouldn't we be handling the options in order?
> >
> > I am sure I am just missing something obvious, so do not trouble
> > yourself if you do not know the answer offhand.
> 
> Sorry, I don't know ;-)

Hopefully I am not wasting your time by responding to an old thread, but
I figured this out and wanted to post it for posterity.

The answer is that it is not about handling _options_ in order, but that
we need to handle pseudo-options in order with non-options, like:

  foo --not bar

Stepping through the options with parseopt will just cover dashed
options, but we handle non-option arguments later. So we have to handle
the pseudo-arguments like "--not" at the same later time.

So there's nothing interesting to clean up or fix here.

-Peff
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]