Re: [PATCH v2] completion: add new git_complete helper

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 16, 2012, 20:04 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMP44s2_VYNFeBi9GPa9CeqT=oRmSq1J1XaSP+aKgC6bJ55Lfg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20120416160729.GM5813@burratino>

On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> I am OK with introducing git_ps1 while keeping __git_ps1 as an equivalent
>> and declare that git_$anything will be the surface interface for end users
>> to *use* the machinery we provide, though.
>
> The problem is that completion scripts are often included implicitly
> in .profile through the bash completion machinery.  Users do not have
> to explicitly ask for them, so there is no reason for users to expect
> that the function name "more_cowbell" is dangerous to use in .profile
> because some day the completion script for the "more" command will
> start using it.

Sure, that's why we would have _git_cowbell instead, so for *most* of functions the user would have no trouble, it would *only* be git_completion the one without prefix, and I think the name is quite safe. There's quite likely few, probably nobody, actually using that function name in their profiles.

Also, the script would now be loaded only *after*, the user types 'git <TAB>'. And there's already a bunch of functions that are already exported by just having bash completion: have(), quote(), dequote(), quote_readline(). And there's at least one script that uses a function without a prefix: ri_get_methods()

I would like to see a completion script that actually has a function supposed to be exported and that still uses the _ prefix anyway.

Cheers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras