Re: [PATCH 3/3] parse-options: remove PARSE_OPT_NEGHELP

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> ... Would it be
> better to simply be explicit that an option is a reversed boolean (i.e.,
> what the user specifies on the command line and what is in the code are
> naturally opposites). Like:
>
>  OPT_REVERSE_BOOL(0, "no-index", &use_index,
>              "finds in contents not managed by git"),

You said it much better than my attempt ;-).

> Using NEGHELP, the "reverse" is between the option name and the
> description, which is very subtle. Here it is between the option name
> and the variable, which is hopefully a little more explicit (especially
> with the big REVERSE in the macro name).
>
> I dunno. Given that there are only two uses of NEGHELP, and that they
> don't come out too badly, I don't care _too_ much. But I have seen some
> really tortured logic with double-negations like this, and I'm concerned
> that a few months down the road somebody is going to want NEGHELP (or
> something similar) in a case where it actually does really impact
> readability.

Yeah, I share a similar minor and iffy feeling about the result.