Re: [PATCH] i18n: factorize even more 'incompatible options' messages
- From
Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
- Date
- Nov 27, 2023, 17:48 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAPig+cR_SN5yJbNQC8F6--hhTj-5_KW97WVszFDOfub=R_OeZQ@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <d1f28272-635d-4638-b0f4-76d64013b0d5@web.de>
On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 12:39 PM René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de> wrote:
Show 15 quoted lines
> Am 26.11.23 um 18:49 schrieb Eric Sunshine: > > A couple additional instances recently slipped into `show-ref.c` which > > were caught during review[1,2] but nevertheless made it to > > "master"[3,4]. This patch, of course, doesn't need to address those, > > but if rerolling for some other reason, perhaps they can be included, > > as well(?). > > > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAPig+cSrp7vZuy7D_ENHKZKZzF4OSmCtfYNHPGMtS1Hj6gArDw@mail.gmail.com/ > > [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAPig+cRTOMie0rUf=Mhbo9e2EXf-_2kQyMeqpB9OCRB1MZZ1rw@mail.gmail.com/ > > [3]: 199970e72f (builtin/show-ref: ensure mutual exclusiveness of > > subcommands, 2023-10-31) > > [4]: 9080a7f178 (builtin/show-ref: add new mode to check for reference > > existence, 2023-10-31) > > [4] changes the message added by [3], so that's one instance, right?
Yes, correct. Sorry for misleadingly saying there were two new messages; it's been a month since I looked at the patches closely, and forgot that it was just the single message which had been modified by the subsequent patch.
Thanks for taking care of this so quickly!
Show 14 quoted lines
> --- >8 --- > Subject: [PATCH] show-ref: use die_for_incompatible_opt3() > > Use the standard message for reporting the use of multiple mutually > exclusive options by calling die_for_incompatible_opt3() instead of > rolling our own. This has the benefits of showing only the actually > given options, reducing the number of strings to translate and making > the UI slightly more consistent. > > Adjust the test to no longer insist on a specific order of the > reported options, as this implementation detail does not affect the > usefulness of the error message. > > Signed-off-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Apparently, I haven't been following along closely enough, thus wasn't aware that we had the die_for_incompatible_opt*() family of functions. Neat.