Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Sergey Organov wrote: >> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > Sergey Organov wrote: >> > >> >> I'd rather think about generic interface for setting/clearing >> >> (multiple) bits through CI than resorting to such convenience >> >> tricks. Once that is in place, one will be able to say "I need these >> >> bits only", "I need to turn these bit(s) on", and "I need to turn >> >> these bit(s) off" conveniently and universally in any part of Git CI >> >> where it's needed. >> > >> > It's possible to achieve both. >> > >> > Imagine your ideal explicit interface. In that interface the default >> > is no output, so you *have* to specify all the bits, for example: >> > >> > git show --patch >> >> No, that's not what I meant. There is no point in making "git show" to >> have no output by default, please see below. >> >> > >> > Or: >> > >> > git show --raw >> > >> > In this ideal interface it's clear what the user wants to do, because >> > it's explicit. >> > >> > git show --patch --raw --no-patch >> > >> > Agreed? >> > >> > My proposal achieves your ideal explicit interface, except when no >> > format is specified (e.g. `git show`), a default format is chosen for >> > the user, but that's *only* if the user hasn't specified any format. >> >> My point is that the default format should be selected as if it has been >> provided by existing options, rather than by some magic hidden in the >> code. > > But why? > > I don't see any benefit, only drawbacks. > >> > If you explicitely specify the output format that you want, then the >> > default is irrelevant to you, thus you have your ideal explicit >> > interface. >> >> That's not what I had in mind, sorry. It'd rather be something like: >> >> --raw: set "raw" bit and clear all the rest >> --+raw set "raw" bit (== current --raw) >> ---raw clear "raw" bit (== --no-raw) >> >> In this model >> >> git show >> >> would be just an alias for >> >> git log -n1 --patch --cc >> >> and no support for a separate command would be need in the first place. >> >> git show --raw >> >> would then produce expected output that makes sense due to the common >> option processing rules, not because somebody had implemented some >> arbitrary "defaults" for the command. > > But now you are at the mercy of those "arbitrary defaults". No, see below. > > Let's say those defaults change, and now the default output of `git show` is > `--stat`. > > Now to generate the same output you have to do: > > git show --raw > > in one version of git, and: > > git show --no-stat --patch --raw > > in another. No: --raw in my model clears all the flags but --raw, so git show --raw will produce exactly the same result: raw output only. Thanks, -- Sergey Organov
