Re: [PATCH 2/4] Teach git-add--interactive to accept a file path to patch

From: Wincent Colaiuta <win@wincent.com>
Date: Nov 21, 2007, 16:15 UTC
Message-ID: <A57F69DB-8AEC-4E48-8309-866D1B72C261@wincent.com>
In-Reply-To: <20071121152118.GG24108@sigill.intra.peff.net>

El 21/11/2007, a las 16:21, Jeff King escribió:

Show 21 quoted lines

> On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 01:36:39PM +0100, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
>
>> +if ($#ARGV == 0) {
>> +	patch_update_file($ARGV[0]);
>> +}
>
> Why only one file? How about something like this instead:
>
> diff --git a/git-add--interactive.perl b/git-add--interactive.perl
> index fb1e92a..8036c95 100755
> --- a/git-add--interactive.perl
> +++ b/git-add--interactive.perl
> @@ -804,5 +804,8 @@ sub main_loop {
> }
>
> refresh();
> +foreach my $file (@ARGV) {
> +	patch_update_file($file);
> +}
> status_cmd();
> main_loop();

Yes, that makes sense. I wasn't sure how to handle multiple files, but I guess just looping through them is fine.

Show 8 quoted lines

> On top of that, it would be great to be able to do something like
>
>  git-add -i *.c
>
> and just get prompted for changed files (right now, you only get
> prompted for changed files, but unchanged files seem to print a  
> spurious
> newline).

That spurious newline comes from the last line of the patch_update_file function (previously named patch_update_cmd):

	print "\n";

The solution will be to do an early return, printing nothing for those unchanged files (and same thing for untracked files). Will look into it.

> And at any rate, this would require fixing 3/4 to handle the multiple
> files from git-add.
>
> What do you think?

Should have some time later this evening or tomorrow to incorporate your suggestions.

Cheers, Wincent