Re: feature-request: git "cp" like there is git mv.

[Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>]

On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Stefan Moch <stefanmoch@mail.de> writes:
>
>> * Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> [2017-12-15T17:31:30-0800]:
>>> This sounds like a reasonable thing to add.  See builtin/mv.c for how
>>> "git mv" works if you're looking for inspiration.
>>>
>>> cmd_mv in that file looks rather long, so I'd also be happy if someone
>>> interested refactors to break it into multiple self-contained pieces
>>> for easier reading (git mostly follows
>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html#functions).
>>
>> I looked at builtin/mv.c and have a rough idea how to split it
>> up to support both mv and cp commands.
>>
>> But first I noticed and removed a redundant check in cmd_mv,
>> also added a test case to check if mv --dry-run does not move
>> the file.
>
> I guess these two patches went unnoticed when posted at the end of
> last year.  Reading them again, I think they are good changes.
>
> As a no-op clean-up of a127331c ("mv: allow moving nested
> submodules", 2016-04-19), the attached would also make sense, I
> would think.
>
> Thanks.
>
>  builtin/mv.c | 7 ++++---
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/mv.c b/builtin/mv.c
> index 9662804d23..9cb07990fd 100644
> --- a/builtin/mv.c
> +++ b/builtin/mv.c
> @@ -266,10 +266,11 @@ int cmd_mv(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>                 const char *src = source[i], *dst = destination[i];
>                 enum update_mode mode = modes[i];
>                 int pos;
> -               if (show_only || verbose)
> -                       printf(_("Renaming %s to %s\n"), src, dst);
> -               if (show_only)
> +               if (show_only) {
> +                       if (verbose)
> +                               printf(_("Renaming %s to %s\n"), src, dst);
>                         continue;
> +               }

This is actually changing behavior to

    if (show_only && verbose)
        print(...)

    if show_only
        continue

The second part is already there as is, only the printing behavior
actually changes.

So I might be missing the obvious here for the claim of no-op?

Looking up further we have (line 177):

    if (show_only)
        printf(_("Checking rename of '%s' to '%s'\n"), src, dst);

which prints regardless of verbosity.