Re: [PATCH v2] ws: add new tab-between-non-ws check

> Adrian Ratiu <adrian.ratiu@collabora.com> writes:
>
>> The check is a bit complex because we want to detect places where
>> a SP was intended (HT can expand to more than one display column),
>> so we need to count both the display columns (col) and the string
>> character columns (i) to determine if a HT looks identical to a SP
>> or can cause confusion.
>>
>> +/....adoc text eol=lf whitespace=trail,space,incomplete,tab-between-non-ws
>
> The name of the whitespace rule does not quite match what we want to
> catch.  Can somebody find a phrasing than "between non-ws" that
> conveys our intent better?  We want to catch a tab that is used by
> mistsake when the writer would have used a space, and "between
> non-ws" is one of the heuristics (another is "it is at the 7th
> column to make it indistinguishable from a space") the code uses to
> tell if a tab is such a mistaken tab.   "tab-instead-of-space"?
> "tab-in-place-of-space"?  "tab-that-should-have-been-a-space"?
>
> The last one is horrible and not a serious suggestion, of course.

>> +test_expect_success 'check tab between non-whitespace (tab-between-non-ws: off)' '
>> +	git config core.whitespace "-tab-between-non-ws" &&
>> +
>> +	printf "1234567\tb" >x &&
>
> I notice all these printf create incomplete lines.  It is true that
> the detection of a tab that is used when it should have been a space
> should work even on an incomplete line, but using an incomplete
> line, which is of course rather unusual, for these tests gives a
> false impression that somehow this requires an incomplete line to
> trigger, which is not what we want to give.
>
> 	printf "1234567\tb\n" > x &&
>
> or something, perhaps?  I dunno.