From: Michael Fallows Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 00:10:45 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] git.c: Remove unnecessary new line Message-ID: <513BCF85.7050605@fallo.ws> In-Reply-To: <20130310000023.GI3908@elie.Belkin> On 10/03/13 00:00, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > > Michael Fallows wrote: > >> --- a/git.c >> +++ b/git.c >> @@ -316,8 +316,7 @@ static void handle_internal_command(int argc, const char **argv) >> { "check-ignore", cmd_check_ignore, RUN_SETUP | NEED_WORK_TREE }, >> { "check-ref-format", cmd_check_ref_format }, >> { "checkout", cmd_checkout, RUN_SETUP | NEED_WORK_TREE }, >> - { "checkout-index", cmd_checkout_index, >> - RUN_SETUP | NEED_WORK_TREE}, >> + { "checkout-index", cmd_checkout_index, RUN_SETUP | NEED_WORK_TREE }, > > This wrapped line was introduced a while ago (4465f410, checkout-index > needs a working tree, 2007-08-04). It was the first line to wrap, but > it was also the longest line at the time. > > Now the longest line is > > { "merge-recursive-theirs", cmd_merge_recursive, RUN_SETUP | NEED_WORK_TREE }, > > (94 columns), so you are right that consistency would suggest dropping > the line wrapping for checkout-index. > > But I find it hard to convince myself that alone is worth the churn. > In what context did you notice this? Is the intent to help scripts to > parse the commands[] list, or to manipulate it while preserving > formatting to avoid distractions? Did you notice the broken line > while reading through and get distracted, or did some syntax > highlighting tool notice the oddity, or something else? > > Hope that helps, > Jonathan > I do agree with you it does seem like a silly small change in the context of the project! I noticed it when reading through the source code (I felt working with git is nice but why not see what makes it tick). I will admit also, have never contributed to git and my C is nowhere near the standard worthy of any real contribution so this was also a step for me to see exactly how the world of patch contribution works too :D. Thanks, Michael