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: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4A51F4CE for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 18:16:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235509AbiDHSSV (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2022 14:18:21 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45282 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230482AbiDHSST (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2022 14:18:19 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (pb-smtp21.pobox.com [173.228.157.53]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C257F18B21 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 11:16:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5139E1885FD; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 14:16:15 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=i4Ib5Ye7D+qe5M79rRYaN4wrEC0Jju9NXvD3yB mhL0o=; b=J7+j23O09moRlTMRpzHYbn5Ep9Sof9zzS7wLoiRICeGZp6HYiFB4O2 PnKE7TeQ8Q2LjueiGBAvTVPmN/3rqhrKiMu+aS39A5vPm4+DqguDoU0VW4IW2sRd rolsPkFodpDznNU03vTett+am/RJtgf27++VP6WHHNXAaT8IeNbzY= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D411885FC; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 14:16:15 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.185.214.157]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 450AA1885FB; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 14:16:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Philip Oakley Cc: Bagas Sanjaya , Edmundo Carmona Antoranz , whydoubt@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] blame: report correct number of lines in progress when using ranges References: <20220404182129.33992-1-eantoranz@gmail.com> <8622e48c-9f34-c644-4016-02c3795ac1e9@iee.email> <9920b355-9003-e7c7-77ab-3432651674e9@iee.email> Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2022 11:16:11 -0700 In-Reply-To: <9920b355-9003-e7c7-77ab-3432651674e9@iee.email> (Philip Oakley's message of "Fri, 8 Apr 2022 09:03:55 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F8A91E96-B767-11EC-B013-CBA7845BAAA9-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Philip Oakley writes: >> But I do not object to being more explicit. > > The core point though was that it can be misunderstood, thus avoiding > the indirection, as you say, makes it more explicit for the reader. Yup. FWIW, I was saying that what the author wrote was not _wrong_ per-se. I agree that being explicit here (instead of hiding behind a pronoun) is an improvement. Thanks.