On 26-ene-2024 09:30:44, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Rubén Justo <rjusto@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Let's have a function to get the current subcommand when completing
> > commands that follow the syntax:
> >
> > git <command> <subcommand>
> >
> > As a convenience, let's allow an optional "default subcommand" to be
> > returned if none is found.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > contrib/completion/git-completion.bash | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash b/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash
> > index 916e137021..5f2e904b56 100644
> > --- a/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash
> > +++ b/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash
> > @@ -575,6 +575,26 @@ __gitcomp_subcommand ()
> > fi
> > }
> >
> > +# Find the current subcommand for commands that follow the syntax:
> > +#
> > +# git <command> <subcommand>
> > +#
> > +# 1: List of possible subcommands.
> > +# 2: Optional subcommand to return when none is found.
> > +__git_find_subcommand ()
> > +{
> > + local subcommand subcommands="$1" default_subcommand="$2"
>
> Are the callers expected to form "$1" by concatenating known tokens
> with a space?
>
> I am just wondering if we can avoid looping, e.g.
>
> local nextword=${words[__git_cmd_idx+1]}
> case " $subcommands " in
> *" $nextword "*)
> echo "$nextword"
> return
> ;;
> esac
>
I like the idea; and it works:
$ words=("a" "b"); __git_cmd_idx=0; __git_find_subcommand "a b" "test"
b
$ : simulate that the user moves the cursor backwards
$ words=("a" "" "b"); __git_cmd_idx=0; __git_find_subcommand "a b" "test"
test
$ : simulate that the user moves the cursor backwards
$ words=("a" " " "b"); __git_cmd_idx=0; __git_find_subcommand "a b" "test"
test
But functions like __git_find_on_cmdline or __git-find_last_on_cmdline
are already iterating. I feel we should keep the loop.
Thank you.
