Re: [RFC] Should "log --cc" imply "log --cc -p"?
- From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 5, 2013, 14:27 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CACBZZX7JNwZYHn--Cp4g1rLPratJ9nEa-Q8HsYk65jjDYAkFqA@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20130205112249.GE24973@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
Show 22 quoted lines
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 11:16:52AM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote: >> > "git log/diff-files -U8" do not need "-p" to enable textual patches, >> > for example. It is "I already told you that I want 8-line context. >> > For what else, other than showing textual diff, do you think I told >> > you that for?" and replacing "8-line context" with various other >> > options that affect patch generation will give us a variety of end >> > user complaints that would tell us that C) is more intuitive to >> > them. >> >> On a related note I think "--full-diff" should imply "-p" too. > > I don't think that is in the same class. --full-diff is quite useful for > many other diff formats. E.g.: > > git log --full-diff --raw Makefile > > If you are proposing to default to "-p" when "--full-diff" is used but > no format is given, that is a slightly different thing. The --full-diff > in such a case is indeed useless, but I do not think it necessarily > follows that "-p" was what the user wanted.
You're right. I didn't notice that it could work with other things besides -p.
On a related note then, it's a bit confusing that it's called "--full-diff" when it doesn't actually show a diff.