Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/1] ls-remote: inconsistency from the order of args and opts
- From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jan 14, 2022, 20:57 UTC
- Message-ID
- <220114.86y23iqbbk.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqbl0eaw2e.fsf@gitster.g>
nOn Fri, Jan 14 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 26 quoted lines
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes: > >> We have multiple commands that are in GNU-fashion loose about whether >> you provide options first before no-option args, or after. E.g. we >> accept both of: >> >> git push --dry-run <remote> <ref> >> >> And: >> >> git push <remote> <ref> --dry-run > > Yes, but I consider that a bug that we cannot fix due to backward > compatibility issues. > > That is why my preference is to encourage users to stick to the > POSIX way in gltcli, just like we recommend "stuck" form of options > its parameter. > >> But when GNU came around its option parser was generally happy to accept >> options and args in either order. E.g. these both work with GNU >> coreutils, but the latter will fail on FreeBSD and various other >> capital-U UNIX-es: >> >> touch foo; rm -v foo >> touch foo; rm foo -v
This is only an approximate list, but:
$ git grep -C3 'parse_options' -- 'builtin/*.c'|grep -c PARSE_OPT_STOP_AT_NON_OPTION
16
$ git grep -C3 'parse_options' -- 'builtin/*.c'|grep -c -F ', 0);'
101The GNU-like behavior is far more common in our codebase, and I think it's less surprising if commands work the same way for consistency.
I manually looked through the PARSE_OPT_STOP_AT_NON_OPTION cases, and I think this is the only one that's using it for no good reason. The others (e.g. "git config") would become ambiguous or error out as a result.
Show 7 quoted lines
> Yes, among the harm GNU has done on mankind, this is one of the > biggest ones. We shouldn't waste our engineering time to support > more of them in our tools. > > As long as users stick to the recommended "dashed options first and > then args, among which revs come first and then pathspecs", they > will be fine.
I find it quite useful. E.g. if you typo a command or forget/want to remove an option:
git push origin HEAD --dry-run
You can just (under readline) do C-p M-DEL, instead of the equivalent navigating back a few words, or having to use more advanced readline features like ^--dry-run^^ or whatever.
Anecdotally, I've been surprised by the amount of regular terminal users whose readline skills pretty much and at using the arrow keys to make command corrections. I think this GNU UX decision has probably saved several accumulated man-lifetimes by now :)