Lee Marlow <lee.marlow@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hmm. The has_doubledash test seems redundant since we don't do
> > anything with args that aren't --foo. Even though git-grep will
> > accept a tree-ish and thus completion of __git_refs here may
>
> I haven't found myself using grep to search anything but the current
> working directory. I wonder whether __git_complete_file would be
> better than __git_refs. My issue with __git_complete_file in this
> case and also doing completion for 'git mv' is that it falls back to
> just __git_refs. Would it be better if it fell back to __git_refs and
> ls-tree for HEAD? That way when using completion to get to
> Documentation/git-grep.txt, it doesn't also show completions for
> Documentation/git-grep.{1,html,xml}.
Hmm. __git_complete_file is about completing something in a tree-ish,
which is really most likely not what we want for grep. Its useful for
git-show and git-cat-file, and that's about it. Most git tools prefer
a calling format of "tree-ish -- paths ..." and not "tree-ish:path".
Though I think you have an excellent point about completing paths
by ls-tree for HEAD rather than the working directory itself,
as then you can avoid produced files. But in practice how often
do you pass a single file or a couple of files to the grep utility
and are having problems bypassing the build products? Compared to
just running grep on the entire source tree to find hits? I never
use grep to search in a single file, but I call it several times
a day to look for where a function is defined or called.
After having thought about it your original patch makes the most
sense, but without the has_doubledash test.
--
Shawn.
--
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
