From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: "René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>,
"Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] various: disallow --no-no-OPT for --no-opt options
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 19:40:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqh91lce6y.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170419014143.56io56xn6mawy5xi@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 18 Apr 2017 21:41:43 -0400")
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:29:18AM +0200, René Scharfe wrote:
> ...
>> PARSE_OPT_NONEG should only be used for options where a negation doesn't
>> make sense, e.g. for the --stage option of checkout-index.
>
> I think we do strive to avoid "--no-no-foo", and instead have "--no-foo"
> and "--foo" to cover both sides. So for example:
>
>> > - OPT_BOOL(0, "no-add", &state->no_add,
>> > + OPT_BOOL_NONEG(0, "no-add", &state->no_add,
>> > N_("ignore additions made by the patch")),
>
> This could be more like:
>
> OPT_NEGBOOL(0, "add", &state->no_add, ...)
>
> where NEGBOOL would be smart enough to show "--no-add" in the help as
> the primary.
I very much appreciate that this topic to avoid --no-no-OPT
nonsense, but just disabling --no-no-OPT without giving --OPT the
meaning the user who would have used --no-no-OPT wanted does not
sound like a good solution. Your NEGBOOL looks like a better
approach.
> It might even be possible to detect the existing line and
> have parse-options automatically respect "--foo" when "--no-foo" is
> present. But that may run afoul of callers that add both "--foo" and
> "--no-foo" manually.
True but wouldn't that something we would want to avoid anyway?
That is, "git cmd [--OPT | --no-OPT | --no-no-OPT]" from the end
user's point of view should be an error because it is unclear what
difference there are between --OPT and --no-no-OPT. And we should
be able to add a rule to parse_options_check() to catch such an
error.
Having said that, I am not sure if we want to go the route of
"existing line that begins with 'no-' behaves magical". For
boolean, I suspect we may be get away with such a magic without
confusing ourselves too much, though.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-19 2:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-18 17:09 [PATCH] various: disallow --no-no-OPT for --no-opt options Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-04-18 22:29 ` René Scharfe
2017-04-19 1:41 ` Jeff King
2017-04-19 2:40 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2017-04-19 2:50 ` Jeff King
2017-04-19 7:02 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-04-19 9:08 ` Jacob Keller
2017-04-19 15:05 ` Jeff King
2017-04-19 7:00 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-04-19 13:11 ` René Scharfe
2017-04-19 13:19 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-04-19 13:44 ` René Scharfe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqh91lce6y.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=l.s.r@web.de \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).