2007/11/10, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Carlos Rica <jasampler@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Also, this removes those tests ensuring that repeated
> > -m options don't allocate memory more than once, because now
> > this is done after parsing options, using the last one
> > when more are given. The same for -F.
>
> The reason for this change is...? Is this because it is
> cumbersome to detect and refuse multiple -m options using the
> parseopt API? If so, the API may be what needs to be fixed.
> Taking the last one and discarding earlier ones feels to me an
> arbitrary choice.
You can do many things with repeated options.
Here in git-tag we considered two different ways to manage them:
Concatenating values for the option and/or refusing more than one.
I found that current option-parser can do both from the client
using callbacks, as Pierre shows me, so I think it is the right way to do it.
Pierre, by default, I think that the parser should print an error
when more than one option of the same type is given,
in order to report it to the command-line user,
but make this behaviour optional for the programmer.
Specifically, I thought in this last option:
enum parse_opt_option_flags {
PARSE_OPT_OPTARG = 1,
PARSE_OPT_NOARG = 2,
PARSE_OPT_ALLOWREP = 4
};
> While I freely admit that I do not particularly find the "One -m
> introduces one new line, concatenated to form the final
> paragraph" handling of multiple -m options done by git-commit
> nice nor useful, I suspect that it would make more sense to make
> git-tag and git-commit handle multiple -m option consistently,
> if you are going to change the existing semantics. Since some
> people really seem to like multiple -m handling of git-commit,
> the avenue of the least resistance for better consistency would
> be to accept and concatenate (with LF in between) multiple -m
> options.
>
> With multiple -F, I think erroring out would be the sensible
> thing to do, but some people might prefer concatenation. I do
> not care either way as long as commit and tag behave
> consistently.
Then, Kristian, what are you willing to do in such case?
It seems easier for me to concatenate of -m and -F options, even when
both types are given. I don't know why "people" want multiple -m options,
but I think that mixing -m and -F options could be interesting for them too.
If someone know if this have been discussed and decided already,
please give me the link.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
