Re: GSOC idea: build in scripts and cleanups

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 10:55:22AM +0200, Robert David wrote:

> > If I were considering cleaning up and porting add--interactive to C, I
> > think I would probably start with just porting the "-p" patch loop
> > first. I think it's the part that most people use, and most callers
> > don't support a generic "-i" but just the "-p" interface (e.g., you can
> > do "git add -i" or "git add -p", but only "git checkout -p"). And that
> > cuts down the size of the task somewhat.
> 
> I have read all the code in git-add--interactive. If I understand that 
> correct, you mean to separate -i and -p int two different commands.
> And make the -p option more like the -i (but just only for patching).
> 
> And consequently port them to C. 

Sort of. The approach I would take would be:

  1. write patch loop code in C (i.e., the code that is going to replace
     the --patch code path from git-add--interactive.perl), and make it
     call-able from within other C programs

  2. write a new command, "git-add--interactive-patch", that behaves
     like "git-add--interactive --patch", but is based on your new C
     code.

  3. Port C callers of "git-add--interactive --patch" to the new
     interface from (1). This should be "add -p", "checkout -p", and
     "reset -p".

  4. Port non-C callers of "git-add--interactive --patch" to the new
     command from (2). This should be git-add--interactive.perl and
     git-stash.sh.

  5. Remove the perl patch code in git-add--interactive.perl; you can
     replace it with a call to git-add--interactive-patch.

But that doesn't mean that's the way it has to be done. Just what I
would do. :)

> > As far as cleanup versus features, I think Thomas would have to comment
> > on that. He is the one who did the most work on patch-mode, and
> > therefore the one who most thinks it needs cleaned up. :)
> 
> Is Thomas going to be a mentor in this task?

I hope so. I can also co-mentor if it helps.

-Peff