From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 00:18:43 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add proof-of-concept %[w(width,in1,in2)<<any-string>>%] implementation
Message-ID: <7vy6naq3do.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <200910170200.03681.jnareb@gmail.com>

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:

> Why not
>
>     %[w(-1,4,4)%s%+b]

Yeah.  As you said "subject unwrapped and body indented" or something like
that, I excluded that part outside the indentation, but log output indents
everything, so placing both inside %[w] would be correct.

> (i.e. %+ is this empty line between subject and body, if it exists).

As %+ is to add LF iff the next expansion is non-empty, it must always be
followed by an expansion, i.e. %something.  That means "%+%something" is
unnecessary verbose and "%+something" is enough.  "%+anything" syntax,
just like "%[func()anything]" syntax, is not limited to any particular
expansion.

> The %+x seems a bit strange... but I guess implementing conditional
> expansion a la shell or rpn spec/queryformat would be out of question
> (i.e. %?s:+ )...

Why not?

I can see us doing something like %[conditional%|iftrue%|iffalse%] quite
easily, now we have the "nested" variant of the strbuf_expand()
infrastructure.

But that is not the primary focus of the two patch series I've
demonstrated so far.