Hey,
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 4:43 AM, Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 12:11 PM, Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> From: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> +Some atoms like %(align) and %(if) always require a matching %(end).
>> +We call them "opening atoms" and sometimes denote them as %($open).
>> +
>> +When a scripting language specific quoting is in effect (i.e. one of
>> +`--shell`, `--perl`, `--python`, `--tcl` is used), except for opening
>> +atoms, replacement from every %(atom) is quoted when and only when it
>> +appears at the top-level (that is, when it appears outside
>> +%($open)...%(end)).
>> +
>> +When a scripting language specific quoting is in effect, everything
>> +between a top-level opening atom and its matching %(end) is evaluated
>> +according to the semantics of the opening atom and its result is
>> +quoted.
>> +
>>
>
> Nice, I like the explanation above.
>
All thanks to Eric, Junio, Christian, Matthieu and everyone else who
helped me phrase
these.
>>
>> + }
>> + } else if (!if_then_else->condition_satisfied)
>
> Minor nit. I'm not sure what standard we use here at Git, but
> traditionally, I prefer to see { } blocks on all sections even if only
> one of them needs it. (That is, only drop the braces when every
> section is one line.) It also looks weird with a comment since it
> appears as multiple lines to the reader. I think the braces improve
> readability.
>
> I don't know whether that's Git's code base standard or not, however.
> It's not really worth a re-roll unless something else would need to
> change.
>
I believe this is the syntax followed in Git, xdiff/xmerge.c:173 and so on.
You're comments are right on though.
--
Regards,
Karthik Nayak