On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 12:50:23AM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > >> As this is pretty-much a test-only option, perhaps going longer but > >> more descriptive would make sense? > >> > >> git rev-parse --compute-abbrev-length-for <object-count> > >> > >> may be an overkill, but something along those lines. > > > > You could even default <object-count> to the number of objects in the > > repository. Which implies that perhaps the best spot is the command > > where we already count the number of objects, git-count-objects. > > That's documented as reporting loose objects by default, although it has > a full report with -v. True, though I think that's mostly for historical reasons. It _could_ be part of the full report, like: $ git count-objects -v ... abbrev-len: 12 but from your test-script usage, I'd expect you'd want to be able to feed a fake count to it, like: git count-objects --compute-abbrev-len=1234 or something (of course you _could_ also make a repository with N objects, but that's a lot more expensive). > Maybe rev-parse isn't the right place, I just picked it because it seems > to be the general utility belt for stuff that doesn't fit elsewhere. > > But putting it in git-count-objects seems like a bit more of a stretch > given the above. I dunno. It seems like less of a stretch to me, but it is true that rev-parse is already a kitchen sink repository. I can live with it either way. -Peff
