Christian Couder <christian.couder@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> * cc/skip-to-optional-val (2017-12-07) 7 commits >> - t4045: test 'diff --relative' for real >> - t4045: reindent to make helpers readable >> - diff: use skip-to-optional-val in parsing --relative >> - diff: use skip_to_optional_val_default() >> - diff: use skip_to_optional_val() >> - index-pack: use skip_to_optional_val() >> - git-compat-util: introduce skip_to_optional_val() >> >> Introduce a helper to simplify code to parse a common pattern that >> expects either "--key" or "--key=<something>". >> >> Even though I queued fixes for "diff --relative" on top, it may >> still want a final reroll to make it harder to misuse by allowing >> NULL at the valp part of the argument. > > Yeah, I already implemented that and it will be in the next v3 version. Good. I am hoping that you've followed the discussion on the tests, where all of us agreed that the approach taken by Jacob's one is preferrable over what is queued above? >> Also s/_val/_arg/. > > I am not sure that is a good idea, because it could suggest that the > functions are designed to parse only command option arguments, while > they can be used to parse any "key=val" string where "key" is also > allowed. > >> cf. <xmqqh8t6o9me.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> cf. <xmqqd13uo9d1.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > It doesn't look like s/_val/_arg/ was discussed in the above messages. It came from your statement that was made before the thread, where you said you'll rename it to use arg after I said I suspect that arg would make more sense than val. https://public-inbox.org/git/CAP8UFD2OSsqzhyAL-QG1TOowB-xgbf=kC9wHre+FLc+0J1Xy+Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Thanks.
