Re: [RFC/PATCH 02/11] ref-filter: add 'colornext' atom

[Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Matthieu Moy
>> <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
>>> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Also, please explain here and in the commit message why this highly
>>>> specialized colorizer ('colornext'), is needed even though a more
>>>> general purpose one ('color') is already available.
>>>
>>> It is needed in the current form to allow
>>> %(colornext:blue)%(ifexists:[%s]) to color only the replacement of %s
>>> and not the [].
>>>
>>> But I now think that this would be more elegantly solved by Junio's
>>> %(if) %(endif) idea:
>>>
>>>   %(if:atom) [ %(color:blue)%(atom)%(color:reset) ] %(endif)
>>>
>>> (I added spaces for clarity)
>>
>> I agree, this style seems a lot more elegant and expressive while much
>> easier to understand. Same for doing this to the alignment atoms and
>> such as it solves the same problem(s) there.
>
> Do you mean something like these?
>
>     %(align:left,20) branch %(refname:short) %(end)
>     %(align:middle,20) branch %(refname:short) %(end)
>     %(align:right,20) branch %(refname:short) %(end)
>
> to replace and enhance %(padright:20)?
>
>> I can't speak to how easy it is to implement tho.
>
> Perhaps it would go like this:
>
>  * Instead of always emitting to the standard output, emit() and
>    print_value() will gain an option to append into a strbuf that is
>    passed as argument.  Alternatively, appending to strbuf could be
>    made the only output channel for them; show_ref_array_item() can
>    prepare an empty strbuf, call them repeatedly to fill it, and
>    then print the resulting strbuf itself.
>
>  * Things like %(if) and %(align) would do the following:
>
>    (1) Push the currently active strbuf it got from the calling
>        show_ref_array_item() to the formatting state;
>
>    (2) Create a new strbuf and arrange so that further output would
>        be diverted to this new one; and
>
>    (3) Push the fact that the diverted output will be processed by
>        them (i.e. %(if), %(align), etc.) when the diversion finishes
>        to the formatting state.
>
>  * When %(end) is seen, the currently active strbuf (i.e. the new
>    one created in (2) above for diversion) holds the output made
>    since the previously seen %(if), %(align), etc.  The formatting
>    state knows what processing needs to be performed on that from
>    (3) above.
>
>    - Pop the strbuf where the output of the entire %(if)...%(end)
>      construct needs to go from the formatting state;
>
>    - Have the processing popped from (3) above, e.g. %(if:atom) or
>      %(align:left,20), do whatever they need to do on the diverted
>      output, and emit their result.
>
> Both %(if) and the hypotherical %(align) can use this same
> "diversion" mechanism.  And the above would properly nest,
> e.g.
>
>     %(align:middle,40)%(if:taggerdate)tag %(end)%(refname:short)%(end)
>

This actually looks neat and good, I'll try implementing this :)

-- 
Regards,
Karthik Nayak