Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> + die(_("format: `end` atom used without a supporting atom"));
>>
>> Not a show-stopper, but we may need some wordsmithing for "a
>> supporting atom" here; an end-user would not know what it is.
>
> Probably something like "format: `end` atom should only be
> used with modifier atoms".
Between "supporting" and "modifier" I do not see much difference,
though.
>>> + } else if (skip_prefix(name, "align", &valp)) {
>>
>> This looked as if you are willing to take %(align) in addition to
>> %(align:...), but...
>>
>>> + struct align *align = &v->align;
>>> + struct strbuf **s;
>>> +
>>> + if (valp[0] != ':')
>>> + die(_("format: usage %%(align:<width>,<position>)"));
>>
>> ... apparently that is not what is happening. Why not skip "align:"
>> with colon as the prefix, then?
>
> Cause we wanted to provide an error for usage of "%(ailgn)" without any
> subvalues as such.
Wouldn't it be something that would be caught in the same codepath
as what catches %(unrecognized) in the format string?
--
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