Hello Eric!
On 19/05 02:57, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 2:27 PM Shourya Shukla
> <shouryashukla.oo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Convert submodule subcommand 'set-branch' to a builtin. Port 'set-branch'
> > to 'submodule--helper.c' and call the latter via 'git-submodule.sh'.
>
> You can reduce the redundancy by writing this as:
>
> Convert git-submodule subcommand 'set-branch' to a builtin and
> call it via 'git-submodule.sh'.
Sure! Will do!
> > + struct option options[] = {
> > + OPT__QUIET(&quiet,
> > + N_("suppress output for setting default tracking branch of a submodule")),
>
> This is unusually verbose for a _short_ description of the option.
> Other commands use simpler descriptions. Perhaps take a hint from the
> git-submodule man page:
>
> N("only print error messages")),
>
> However, the bigger question is: Why is the --quiet option even here?
> None of the code in this function ever consults the 'quiet' variable,
> so its presence seems pointless.
I actually wanted to have *some* use of the `quiet` option and delivered
it in the v1, but after some feedback had to scrap it. You may have a
look here:
https://lore.kernel.org/git/20200513201737.55778-2-shouryashukla.oo@xxxxxxxxx/
> Looking at the git-submodule documentation, I see that it is already
> documented as accepted --quiet, so it may make some sense for you to
> accept the option here. However, it might be a good idea either to
> have an in-code comment or a blurb in the commit message explaining
> that this C rewrite accepts the option for backward-compatibility (and
> for future extension), not because it is actually used presently.
That seems like a better idea; should I add this comment just above the
`options` array? BTW, the shell version has a comment about this,
see:
https://github.com/git/git/blob/v2.26.2/git-submodule.sh#L727
> > + OPT_STRING(0, "branch", &opt_branch, N_("branch"),
> > + N_("set the default tracking branch to the one specified")),
>
> Then:
>
> N_("set the default tracking branch")),
Seems good!
> > + OPT_END()
> > + };
> > + const char *const usage[] = {
> > + N_("git submodule--helper set-branch [--quiet] (-d|--default) <path>"),
> > + N_("git submodule--helper set-branch [--quiet] (-b|--branch) <branch> <path>"),
> > + NULL
> > + };
> > +
> > + argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, options, usage, 0);
> > +
> > + if (!opt_branch && !opt_default)
> > + die(_("at least one of --branch and --default required"));
>
> This wording makes no sense considering that --branch and --default
> are mutually exclusive. By writing "at least one of", you're saying
> that you can use _more than one_, which is clearly incorrect. Reword
> it like this:
>
> die(_("--branch or --default required"));
Yeah, I did not realize it until you mentioned this, will correct in the
next version.
> > + if (opt_branch && opt_default)
> > + die(_("--branch and --default do not make sense together"));
>
> A more precise way to say this is:
>
> die(_("--branch and --default are mutually exclusive"));
Will that be clear to everyone? What I mean is maybe a person from a
non-mathematical background (someone doing programming as a hobby maybe)
will not grasp at this at one go and will have to search it's meaning
online. Isn't it fine as-is?
> > + if (argc != 1 || !(path = argv[0]))
> > + usage_with_options(usage, options);
> > +
> > + config_name = xstrfmt("submodule.%s.branch", path);
> > + config_set_in_gitmodules_file_gently(config_name, opt_branch);
>
> Tracing through the config code, I see that
> config_set_in_gitmodules_file_gently() removes the key if 'opt_branch'
> is NULL, which mirrors the behavior of the shell code this is
> replacing. Good.
Thanks! :)
Regards,
Shourya Shukla
