From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2013 23:06:22 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/7] Support for Ruby
Message-ID: <CAMP44s0JnG8wQ6DhHxbrdoxhdt3UTC8WG6R2yVmctGntEx0yzQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20130921235647.GC235845@vauxhall.crustytoothpaste.net>

On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 6:56 PM, brian m. carlson
<sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 05:52:05PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 4:29 PM, brian m. carlson
>> <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> wrote:

>> Now, if anybody has ideas into how the bindings could be more object
>> oriented, I'm all ears, but unfortunately what I foresee is that
>> nobody will consider this proposal seriously.
>
> My concern is that the Ruby code will end up not being idiomatic, and
> people will view it as bizarre and unmaintainable.
>
> for_each_ref could end up being something like REPOSITORY.refs.each,
> which would be more idiomatic.  repository.refs would probably be an
> Enumerator in that case.  If the decision is made to incorporate Ruby
> code, I'm happy to submit some patches to help provide a sane interface,
> even though I'm not that familiar with Ruby.

I think my proposed bindings are quite idiomatic.

git ruby - master origin/master <<EOF
commits = ARGV.map { |id| Git::Commit.get(get_sha1(id)) }
puts get_merge_bases(commits, 0).map { |commit| sha1_to_hex(commit.sha1) }
EOF

-- 
Felipe Contreras