Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 7:33 AM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason > <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 13 2021, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> > Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> I don't care for `--raw` either but couldn't think of anything better >> >> at the time. But perhaps a name such as `--allow-escapes` would be >> >> clearer, or perhaps not. `--c-style-escapes`? >> > >> > It's printf(1) style escapes ;-) >> > >> So, the conclusion of this thread is let's keep it as --printf? > > It was bikeshedding on my part, so I don't feel strongly. As > mentioned, I only brought it up because my first thought was to wonder > how interpolation would work. One might suggest --printf-escapes or > --string-escapes but the audience for this is so narrow (Git > developers) that the short and concise --printf is probably > preferable. After seeing you raised the issue, I wish we had a better option name than --printf to be even more clear, but the wish is not strong enough to make me say "let's stop until we come up with the perfect name". I am OK with --printf Thanks.
