From: Karthik Nayak Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 07:33:34 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 13/17] ref-filter: add `:dir` and `:base` options for ref printing atoms Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Hey, On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:05 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Karthik Nayak writes: > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Jacob Keller writes: >>> ... >>> I think you are going in the right direction. I had a similar >>> thought but built around a different axis. I.e. if strip=1 strips >>> one from the left, perhaps we want to have rstrip=1 that strips one >>> from the right, and also strip=-1 to mean strip everything except >>> one from the left and so on? >> ... > >> If we do implement strip with negative numbers, it definitely >> would be neat, but to get the desired feature which I've mentioned >> below, we'd need to call strip twice, i.e >> to get remotes from /refs/foo/abc/xyz we'd need to do >> strip=1,strip=-1, which could be >> done but ... > > ... would be unnecessary if this is the only use case: > >> strbuf_addf(&fmt, >> "%%(if:notequals=remotes)%%(refname:base)%%(then)%s%%(else)%s%%(end)", >> local.buf, remote.buf); > > You can "strip to leave only 2 components" and compare the result > with refs/remotes instead, no? > Of course, my only objective was that someone would find it useful to have these two additional atoms. So if you think it's unnecessary we could drop it entirely :D -- Regards, Karthik Nayak