"Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > int allow_empty = 0;
> > + int blankline = 1;
>
> So keep this...
>
> > const char *object_ref;
> >G struct notes_tree *t;
> > struct object_id object, new_note;
> > @@ -584,6 +585,8 @@ static int append_edit(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> > parse_reuse_arg),
> > OPT_BOOL(0, "allow-empty", &allow_empty,
> > N_("allow storing empty note")),
> > + OPT_BOOL(0, "blank-line", &blankline,
>
> ...and just make this "no-blank-line", and parse_options() will do the
> right thing. I.e. PARSE_OPT_NONEG is implied.
Sorry for another question. By the explanation of "api-parse-options.txt" :
`OPT_BOOL(short, long, &int_var, description)`::
Introduce a boolean option. `int_var` is set to one with
`--option` and set to zero with `--no-option`
I think it means the same as "parse_options() will do right thing" as you said
to me , but...after the modification the effect is opposite:
diff --git a/builtin/notes.c b/builtin/notes.c
index a6273781fb8..73427ea8dff 100644
--- a/builtin/notes.c
+++ b/builtin/notes.c
@@ -562,6 +562,7 @@ static int copy(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
static int append_edit(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
{
int allow_empty = 0;
+ int blankline = 1;
const char *object_ref;
struct notes_tree *t;
struct object_id object, new_note;
@@ -584,6 +585,8 @@ static int append_edit(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
parse_reuse_arg),
OPT_BOOL(0, "allow-empty", &allow_empty,
N_("allow storing empty note")),
+ OPT_BOOL(0, "no-blank-line", &blankline,
+ N_("insert paragraph break before appending to an existing note")),
OPT_END()
};
int edit = !strcmp(argv[0], "edit");
@@ -618,7 +621,7 @@ static int append_edit(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
enum object_type type;
char *prev_buf = read_object_file(note, &type, &size);
- if (d.buf.len && prev_buf && size)
+ if (blankline && d.buf.len && prev_buf && size)
strbuf_insertstr(&d.buf, 0, "\n");
if (prev_buf && size)
strbuf_insert(&d.buf, 0, prev_buf, size);
----
So, I am a bit confused and I guess maybe somewhere I misunderstood or didn't
notice some details.
Thanks.
