Re: summaries in git add --patch

From: William Pursell <bill.pursell@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 28, 2008, 04:36 UTC
Message-ID: <492F754A.3080204@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7viqq8adsf.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 21 quoted lines

> William Pursell <bill.pursell@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> Stage this hunk [y,n,a,l,d,k,K,j,J,e,?]? l
>> '*' indicates current hunk.  '+' stage, '-' don't stage
>>  0+: @@ -8,9 +8,9 @@ Aani
>>  1 : @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ abandonable
>> *2 : @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ abaton
>>  3 : @@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ abdest
>>  4-: @@ -81192,9 +81192,9 @@ gyrous
>>  5 : @@ -234925,7 +234925,7 @@ zymotic
>> @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ abaton
>>  abator
>>  abattoir
>>  Abatua
>> -abature
>> +agature
>>  abave
>>  abaxial
>>  abaxile
> 
> Machines count from zero but humans count from one.

Humans should change. :)  Good point.

> What is your plans to limit the output of this when there are dozens of
> hunks?

Would having git-add--interactive fork a PAGER be too drastic? It strikes me as probably being unworkable, and a better approach would be too only display a fixed number of lines and not immediately display the current hunk. (In line with your suggestion below to make it a status command.)

Show 7 quoted lines

> A hunk can and often is quite long which would make this list scroll off
> the screen.  Together with the previous point, I suspect it would be
> better to make this not part of the "Stage this one?" question, but an
> action that (1) does not do anything to the hunk we have currently focus
> on, and (2) does not move the focus after it does its thing.  In other
> words, a new "status" action.  I think 'S' is not taken yet although 's'
> is taken for 'split'.

I tend to use 'git add --patch' directly rather than git add --interactive, and would prefer to be able to access the list from there. But your point is definitely valid and my work flow should probably change.

re: 's' vs 'S', I notice that y,n, and d are all case insenstive, but the other commands are not. Is this necessary/desirable?

-- 
William Pursell