From: Thomas Rast Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 06:38:26 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] i18n: am: mark more strings for translation Message-ID: <871uk0ny59.fsf@thomas.inf.ethz.ch> In-Reply-To: <7vwr1sevpu.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Junio C Hamano writes: > Jonathan Nieder writes: > >> Before this patch, it says >> >> The --binary option has been a no-op for a long time, and ... >> >> After the patch, it says >> >> The -b option has been a no-op for a long time, and ... >> >> Intentional? That may be a good change or a bad one (I haven't >> thought clearly about it), but it seems at least worth mentioning. >> Cc-ing Thomas in case he has advice. > > If we really care we could printf $1, but I think we usually do > > The -b/--binary option has been... > > in a case like this, especially in codepaths that no longer has an > easy access to $1 after parsing the command line but knows that > either one of them is given from the parse result, and that would be > an appropriate solution for this particular one as well. Yes. The original plan was to free up -b, but since we don't need --binary any more either, it's better if we can get rid of it the same way. -- Thomas Rast trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch