Re: [PATCH 06/18] t5613: clarify "too deep" recursion tests

> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 01:52:19PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
> >
> >> >> >> > +# Note: These tests depend on the hard-coded value of 5 as "too deep". We start
> >> >> >> > +# the depth at 0 and count links, not repositories, so in a chain like:
> >> >> >> > +#
> >> >> >> > +#   A -> B -> C -> D -> E -> F -> G -> H
> >> >> >> > +#      0    1    2    3    4    5    6
> >> >> >> > +#
> >> [...]
> >> > No, we count links, not repositories. So the "A->B" link is "0", "B->C"
> >> > is "1", and so on.
> >>
> >> If you need to re-roll for some other reason I would add some spaces
> >> around the numbers so they line up better with the links so that this
> >> becomes more clear.
> >
> > Hmm. Now I am puzzled, because I _did_ line up them specifically to make
> > this clear. I put the numbers under the ">" of the arrow. Did I screw up
> > the spacing somehow so that isn't how they look to you? Or are you just
> > saying you would prefer them under the "-" of the arrow?
> >
> > -Peff
> 
> Input from a self-claimed design expert for ASCII art. ;)
> What about this?
> 
> #   A  -0->  B  -1->  C  -2->  ...
> 
> (Double space between letter and arrow, number included in the arrow)