From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Cc: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: js/bisect-in-c, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2022, #05; Mon, 15)
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 11:57:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqtu6avgub.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: CABPp-BFAERLt_z-D=7gbXWVA9JgsqTP_2iW9BLe5S=YbsQ1V6w@mail.gmail.com
Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
>> > Expecting a (hopefully final) reroll.
>> ...
>
> Could I vote for just merging it down, as-is? As far as I can tell,
> ... Further, such changes, while likely
> desirable for consistency among Git commands, would likely move us
> away from "faithful conversion from shell to C", and thus is likely
> better to be done as a separate step on top of the existing series
> anyway[4].
If this were a faithful conversion, yes, merging it right now can be
one good approach; add a faithful but not very C-like convesion
first and then make it "more like C code" later.
I however got an impression from the review discussion that it
subtly changes behaviour (IIRC, one thing pointed out was that exit
codes are now different from the original---there may or may not be
others, but my impression was they were all minor like the "exit
code" one).
My "hopefully final" comment was not about a big rearchitecting
change like use of parse-options API but about adjusting such minor
behaviour diversion so that we can say "This may not be very C-like,
and does not use much of our established API, but it is a fairly
faithful bug-to-bug compatible translation. Let's take it and make
it more like C incrementally". And of course, what was implied in
"hopefully final" was that such adjustments would be tiny, trivial
and can be done without much controversy. After all, I was aware
that the series was otherwise reviewed and received extensive
comments (sorry, I forgot that it was by you).
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-17 18:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-15 21:24 What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2022, #05; Mon, 15) Junio C Hamano
2022-08-16 8:56 ` js/bisect-in-c, was " Johannes Schindelin
2022-08-17 1:26 ` Elijah Newren
2022-08-17 6:27 ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-08-17 18:57 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2022-08-17 19:24 ` Elijah Newren
2022-08-17 20:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-08-19 11:04 ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-08-19 14:40 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-08-16 16:00 ` sy/mv-out-of-cone (was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2022, #05; Mon, 15)) Victoria Dye
2022-08-16 16:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-08-17 2:03 ` Shaoxuan Yuan
2022-08-17 0:36 ` cw/submodule-merge-messages (Was: " Elijah Newren
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=xmqqtu6avgub.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=newren@gmail.com \
/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).