From: demerphq Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:55:26 GMT Subject: Re: git silently ignores aliases of existing commands Message-ID: <9b18b3110907180355s5bf08f8did180caa0c55b3389@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20090718104631.GA27307@coredump.intra.peff.net> 2009/7/18 Jeff King : > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 11:30:25AM +0200, demerphq wrote: > >> Yeah it seems reasonable that if its going to be ignored it should not >> be silently ignored. > > I agree that there should be a warning. However, it's hard to do with > the code structured as it is now; we don't know that a command exists > as an external command until we try to exec it. And if it succeeds, we > don't get to execute any more code. > > It's certainly possible, but sadly it is more surgery than just > >  if (alias_lookup(cmd)) >    warn("you also have an alias defined"); > >> Especially given that the silentness effectively means there cant be >> any new git tools added without possible breakage of installed setups. > > The silentness makes it harder to diagnose problems, but even with a > warning, we can break things by creating new commands. If you have an > alias "foo" and we ship "git-foo" in a newer version of git, your alias > will just stop working. That was my point. At least if there were warnings about this the risk would be mitigated. cheers, Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"