On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 1:13 PM Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 6:44 PM Tamir Duberstein <tamird@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I agree with you that optimizing for git blame while pessimizing for > > normal readers is not what we should do. I don't agree that putting > > boilerplate on its own line is a pessimization for the normal reader - > > in my opinion it is the opposite. Trivial expressions of the form > > But that is a different argument, unrelated to `git blame`, no? Yes it is. I suppose I misunderstood your objection to this rationale, along with > So if you have a change like that, please just change the line, rather than adding new ones just for `git blame`. as an objection to the decision, so I was giving additional rationale. > What I was saying is that, if the only reason one is adding a line is > for `git blame`, then it shouldn't be done. > > But, of course, if there is a different, good reason to add a line, > then it should be done. > > In other words, `git blame` does not play a role here. > > I mean, a reasonable person could say it should at least have a small > weight into the decision, sure. But I don't think we currently do that > and it makes decisions even more complex... Unclear where this leaves us so I'll just go with .cast() in-line.
