From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28A651F461 for ; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 18:08:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730258AbfIISIo (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Sep 2019 14:08:44 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:63274 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730105AbfIISIn (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Sep 2019 14:08:43 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBB25696B6; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 14:08:41 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=dG8Ptbhg9aE3WsVTeZ8zremK0y0=; b=UAepuL wEZ+iR6mtDJ+rNi2dUW9o076e/SyaODBuB8ORHHt4eKwlZI+EVNaV+yJftHkQrmT 7mImGQLjASbMIuiyed3db9XNLjGYVKnbxPbE8Q62d8aH6bmCaWFG5VK10eyfFEVj +dfzL5RbV1fYLP4vBZhn9Gv9MhFI2XpkYcEi4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=aZDSSV+ZEXrFGem6CgLxCK6xgv5inEOZ HpjST4QVJQJc9BlBmX/AZWqMrwtHwXPva3suikCvZd82znhPHWAqBRCGmRw9Mvcg ApIuN0kaxL0JU1iC5Qqk+O+9njtJXZZoTtuP4IWs9a42VvH08Mv50hVnudavvj+t mORk+l0nwUk= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B45AD696B4; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 14:08:41 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E025E696AC; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 14:08:38 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Eric Freese Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] for-each-ref: add '--no-symbolic' option References: <20190907213646.21231-1-ericdfreese@gmail.com> <20190907213646.21231-2-ericdfreese@gmail.com> <20190908100543.GB15641@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2019 11:08:36 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Eric Freese's message of "Sun, 8 Sep 2019 22:01:33 -0600") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: D94E4F8E-D32C-11E9-967E-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Eric Freese writes: > However, this still prints an empty line for each ref that does not match the > condition. This can be cleaned up by piping through `grep .`, but what would > you think of adding a new optional flag to git-for-each-ref to prevent it from > printing empty expanded format strings? Offhand I do not think of a reason why anybody wants to give a format that results in a total blank, so it might not even need to be an optional behaviour, but certainly a new option that triggers such a behaviour would be a safe thing to add.