From: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 15:46:32 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 05/13] ref-filter: implement an `align` atom
Message-ID: <CAOLa=ZQcd37Vq8j9sRYwnio0T3ua5C3frMc7-uEqLWsLo6eYYg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqr3n8jlvv.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 1:54 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 10:43 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> ...
>>> %(objectname:abbrev=8).  To specify two modification magics, each of
>>> which takes a number, the user would say e.g.
>>>
>>>     %(objectname:abbrev=8,magic=4)
>>> ...
>>> And that would be following %(align:8).  Both 'left' (implied
>>> default) and '8' are instructing 'align' what to do.
>>
>> Will follow this. :)
>
> I think the most generic way to think about this is to consider that
> the most fully spelled form of align would be this:
>
>         %(align:width=12,position=left)
>
> And another rule you would have is that the user is allowed to omit
> "<attr>=" when it is obvious from its value.  For "align", 'left'
> can only possibly be the value for 'position' and similarly '12' for
> 'width'.  That is why the "objectname" example says "abbrev=8", and
> not "abbrev,8", because from the value of "8" without the attribute
> name, you cannot tell if the user meant abbrev=8 or magic=8.
>
> That '"<attr>=" can be omitted' rule makes both of these valid
> constructs:
>
>         %(align:12,left) %(align:left,12)
>

Are you sure you want it to be so flexible? I mean It's nice to have it,
but it would include a lot more processing, I'd prefer having either the
generic type you mentioned about so users know what they're typing
or else a predefined way like

           %(align:<width>,<position>)

> Moreover, if you make "left aligned" the default behaviour when
> position is not specified, you can make %(align:12) the shortest way
> to spell the same thing.  Note that I said "if you make"; I do not
> offhand know if all the internal callers of this mechanism your
> updates to "branch -l" and "tag -l" would want left aligned output
> (if so, that is one argument to favor making left-aligned the
> implicit default; if not, it may be better to require the position
> always specified).

Left align is what I'd prefer as default for branch -l and tag -l so
that will be
done.

-- 
Regards,
Karthik Nayak