On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 6:49 AM, Martin Ågren <martin.agren@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 28 May 2018 at 23:45, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>>>> +error: sub/added
>>>>> +error: sub/addedtoo
>>>>> +error: Please move or remove them before you switch branches.
>>>>> Aborting
>>>>> EOF
>>>>
>>>> This shows the typical effect of this series, which (I subjectively
>>>> think) gives us a more pleasant end-user experience.
>>>
>>> Also, very subjectively, I'm torn about this. To me, just one
>>> "error/warning/fatal" at the start of the first paragraph feels much
>>> better. If we have to somehow mark the second paragraph that "this is
>>> also part of the error message" then it's probably better to rephrase.
>
> Would you feel the same about "hint: "? We already do prefix all the
> lines there. It seems to we we should probably do the same for "hint: "
> as for "warning: ", whatever we decide is right.
It may depend on context. Let's look at the commit that introduces
this "hint:" prefix, 38ef61cfde (advice: Introduce
error_resolve_conflict - 2011-08-04). The example in the commit
message shows the hint paragraph sandwiched by an error and a fatal
one:
error: 'commit' is not possible because you have unmerged files.
hint: Fix them up in the work tree ...
hint: ...
fatal: Exiting because of an unresolved conflict.
I think in this case (dense paragraphs of different message types) yes
it might make sense to prefix lines with "hint:". But when there's
only one type of message like the "error" part quoted at the top, it
feels too verbose to have error: prefix everywhere.
--
Duy
