On Sat, Dec 02, 2017 at 09:15:29PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > I tried to think of ways this "show a message and then delete it" could > > go wrong. It should work OK with editors that just do curses-like > > things, taking over the terminal and then restoring it at the end. > > ... > > I think that it is not worth to special-case "dumb" terminals like > this round of the patches do. If it so much disturbs reviewers that > "\e[K" may not work everywhere, we can do without the "then delete > it" part. It was merely trying to be extra nice, and the more > important part of the "feature" is to be noticeable, and I do think > that not showing anything on "dumb", only because the message cannot > be retracted, is putting the cart before the horse. > > Since especially now people are hiding this behind an advise.* > thing, I think it is OK to show a message and waste a line, even. Yeah, I was tempted to suggest just dropping this terminal magic completely. But it probably _does_ work and is helpful in the majority of cases (i.e., where people have in-terminal editors). I dunno. I am a little wary of hiding behind "but you can disable it with a config option", because that's still a thing that users have to actually do to get the previous behavior. And I expect to get some "ugh, git is too chatty and annoying" backlash once this is in a released version. But maybe that is just being paranoid. It's not like we don't have a lot of other advice flags. I really could go either way on this whole thing (but I'll be setting the advice flag myself ;) ). > > An even worse case (and yes, this is really reaching) is: > > > > $ GIT_EDITOR='echo one; printf "two\\r"; vim' git commit > > hint: Waiting for your editor input...one > > Aborting commit due to empty commit message. > > > > There we ate the "two" line. > > Yes, I would have to agree that this one is reaching, as there isn't > any valid reason other than "the editor then wanted to do \e[K > later" for it to end its last line with CR. So our eating that line > is not a problem. Yeah, this was just me trying to come up with all possible implications. I agree it's probably not worth worrying about. -Peff
