Re: [PATCH v1] config: add '--sources' option to print the source of a config value
- From
Sebastian Schuberth <sschuberth@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 8, 2016, 11:25 UTC
- Message-ID
- <56B87B46.6050304@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20160205135855.GA19154@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On 2/5/2016 14:58, Jeff King wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Yeah, I agree it's unlikely. And the output is already ambiguous, as the > first field could be a blob (though I guess the caller knows if they > passed "--blob" or not). If we really wanted an unambiguous output, we > could have something like "file:...", "blob:...", etc. But that's a bit > less readable for humans, and I don't think solves any real-world > problems. > > So I think it would be OK to use "<command line>" here, as long as the > token is documented.
Thinking about it again, I actually do like Peff's prefix solution better. It would solve the real-world problem that my proposed "<command line>" marker could in fact be a file name.
Regards, Sebastian