Re: [PATCH 1/2] [RFC] Use --find- instead of --detect- as prefix for long forms of -M and -C.
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Nov 29, 2010, 22:42 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vmxorzr8k.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <7884E3F5-D622-49E2-BEBE-12936F388C30@sb.org>
Kevin Ballard <kevin@sb.org> writes:
Show 27 quoted lines
> On Nov 10, 2010, at 12:27 PM, Yann Dirson wrote: > >> -M[<n>]:: >> ---detect-renames[=<n>]:: >> +--find-renames[=<n>]:: >> ifndef::git-log[] >> Detect renames. >> endif::git-log[] >> @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ endif::git-log[] >> hasn't changed. >> >> -C[<n>]:: >> ---detect-copies[=<n>]:: >> +--find-copies[=<n>]:: >> Detect copies as well as renames. See also `--find-copies-harder`. >> If `n` is specified, it has the same meaning as for `-M<n>`. > > I'm not sure I like the wording --find-copies and --find-renames. Maybe I'm > just being silly, but it sounds like those are directives, saying "I want you > to find copies/renames", as opposed to just saying "while you're working you > should also detect copies/renames". The original flag --find-copies-harder > is a bit different, because it's modifying the action of finding copies > rather than making finding copies the prime directive. > > On the other hand, --detect-copies and --detect-renames sounds to me like > you're just telling it that it should, well, detect copies/renames as it goes > about its business.
Hmm, but your "harder is different" comes from the knowledge of how it works (namely, the set of paths the frontend feeds to diffcore is made larger), which does not concern the end user. Also the same logic of yours can be applied to argue for renaming "detect renames" to "find renames", as it _does_ tell diffcore to activate the rename finding machinery, i.e. it is modifying the action of computing the differences.
So I think using the same verb would make sense, either by introducing a new synonym "detect-copies-harder", or by giving longer "find-copies" and "find-renames" options to not-so-hard ones.