Re: [PATCH v8 2/5] blame: introduce $ as "end of file" in -L syntax
- From
Thomas Rast <trast@inf.ethz.ch>
- Date
- Mar 13, 2013, 07:52 UTC
- Message-ID
- <87wqtbivms.fsf@pctrast.inf.ethz.ch>
- In-Reply-To
- <7va9q85jt9.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
Show 15 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > >> Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> writes: >> >>> To save the user a lookup of the last line number, introduce $ as a >>> shorthand for the last line. This is mostly useful to spell "until >>> the end of the file" as '-L<begin>,$'. >> >> Doesn't "-L <begin>" or "-L <begin>," do that already? If it were >> to introduce "-L $-4," or "-L$-4,+2", I would understand why the >> addition may be useful, but otherwise I do not think it adds much >> value. > > It is a quiet-period so there is no need to rush, but did anything > happened further on this series?
No, I've been busy :-(
The only open point is in the other email:
Show 16 quoted lines
> >> Documentation/blame-options.txt | 19 +------ > >> Documentation/line-range-format.txt | 18 +++++++ > >> Makefile | 2 + > >> builtin/blame.c | 99 +++------------------------------- > >> line-log.c | 105 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> line-log.h | 23 ++++++++ > > > > Was this churn necessary? > > > > It is strange to move existing functions that will be tweaked to be > > shared by two different codepaths (blame and line-log) to the new > > user. > [...] > > Even though I am moving from builtin/blame.c to line-log.c? I would > otherwise have to call from a rather lib-ish file into a "front
You haven't sent any reply to this. Does that mean you agree? Would you prefer the shared file to be named something like line-range.c?
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch