Re: [RFC PATCH] stash: accept options also when subcommand 'save' is omitted

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Aug 18, 2009, 22:30 UTC
Message-ID: <20090818223028.GB31176@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0908182337200.8306@pacific.mpi-cbg.de>

On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:42:58PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> > I think yours is nicer, especially as we have just added the
> > '-p|--patch' option, as well. With what is there now, you can do "git
> > stash -p", but not "git stash -p -k".
> 
> But it is sloppy, in that it blindly accepts options that might be valid 
> for several subcommands, not just "save".
> 
> That was the reason I did not implement it this way.
> 
> But we do not have such ambiguous options yet.
> 
> Or do we?  Look at what "list" accepts!
> 
> So please register my objection.

I don't see the problem. Either the option works for "stash save" or it does not. If I say "git stash --quiet", then it _must_ be "git stash save --quiet", and not "git stash pop --quiet", because "save" is the only default command. If I say "git stash --foobar", it is translated to "git stash save --foobar", which should generate an error (it doesn't right now, but that is a separate issue). I don't see any confusion: "save" is always the default command, unless one is given as the first argument.

The place where I would see a potential problem is if stash grew any "global" options (e.g., in the same way that "git" can take options before its subcommand name).

-Peff