From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2022 16:46:54 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] catfile.c: add --batch-command mode
Message-ID: <767d5f5a-8395-78bc-865f-a39acc39e061@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <74E01F50-D5B4-41F0-A6F0-BBCA462ED74A@gmail.com>

Hi John

On 04/02/2022 04:11, John Cai wrote:
> Hi Junio, thanks for the review!
>  [...]
>> So, from that point of view,
>>
>>      begin <cmd>
>>      <parameter>
>>      <parameter>
>>      ...
>>      end
>>
>> may be a better design, no?
> 
> Good point. Now I'm wondering if we can simplify where commands get queued up
> and a "get" will execute them along with an implicit flush.
> 
> <cmd> <parameter>
> <cmd> <parameter>
> <cmd> <parameter>
> get

I think that would be an improvement (I'd suggest calling "get" "flush" 
instead), the begin ... get <cmd> sequence seems unnecessarily complex 
compared the the RFC of this series. If the user gives --buffer on the 
command line then we can buffer the input until we see a "flush" command 
and if the user does not give --buffer on the command line then we 
should flush the output after each command.

Best Wishes

Phillip