Re: feature request: git add--interactive --patch on regex-matched hunks only

From: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Jul 26, 2011, 12:44 UTC
Message-ID: <CACsJy8Birqg2Ldp1Mt4NWOq1aT0oigTcFA8S=RWcK5y+zstwDA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110726060903.GA29486@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 12:57:46PM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
>
>> It's my itch. I'm more than happy if you take care of the Perl part,
>> I'll do the rest. While you're doing the Perl part, should we have
>> both --match and --no-match? One filters in. The other filters out. I
>> guess people may find filter-in case more helpful than the other.
>
> Yeah. Also, what about grep options like case-insensitivity? I don't
> want to go too overboard with adding options that are unlikely to be
> used. It is perl, so technically you can do "(?i:foo)" to match "foo"
> case-insensitively.

Or even standard regex with [Ff][Oo][Oo]. We can wait until users complain about the lack of feature. I won't complain because I may need to match non-ascii letters (unless pcre does support unicode, then yes pleasssse)

> I don't think there's a way to do --no-match style negation in the
> regex itself, though.

Your coding skills are needed :)

Show 11 quoted lines

>> I thought of this way initially, but I needed to split hunks in
>> parse_diff and was stuck because I was not familiar with data
>> structure used in git-add--interactive.
>
> Oh yeah, you mentioned splitting before. I'm not sure how that would
> interact with this feature. In some cases, you'd want to split as much
> as possible, and in other cases, you'd want a bigger hunk. So I actually
> think it is an orthogonal feature to "autosplit" hunks before we show
> them to the user. I.e., something like:
>
>  git add -p --autosplit-hunks --hunk-match=...

Yep. Sometimes I do want --autosplit-hunks alone.

> (where maybe the names could be better, but hopefully you get the
> point).

Speaking of names, I'm usually bad at naming, but here goes. How about --hunks=regex, --no-hunks=regex and --split-hunks? We may have --[no-]case-hunks later on but that does sound bad.

<over-engineering>maybe we should support multiple --hunks (or --no-hunks, but not a mix of them), all must be matched, because there are many lines in a hunk and people may want set patterns across lines</over-engineering>

-- 
Duy