From: Nathan W. Panike <nathan.panike@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:10:45 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Use %as and %cs as pretty format flags
Message-ID: <d77df1110808281710r6d58739fl2acb93e1940c7433@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20080828235420.GB30195@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 04:36:51PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> I was actually thinking about rejecting this, asking for something that
>> allows to express all the other %[ai][dDri] format can express, and
>> perhaps more.  So I think "%ad(short)" is a good direction to go, except
>> that 'd' is already taken.  Perhaps %a(date), %a(shortdate,local),...?
>
> I was thinking we could accept %ad _or_ %ad(short), but of course
> introducing the latter can break existing "%ad(my other random text)"
> which is a bad idea.
>
> I really think some consideration should be given to introducing
> arbitrary "arguments" to formatting specifiers, of which this is one
> example. Another that has been mentioned is pulling an arbitrary element
> from a list.
>
> How do you feel about a brand new syntax (and supporting the old, of
> course) that is syntactically a little easier to extend. Like:
>
>  %(macro, key=val, key=val)
>
> e.g.
>
>  %(authordate, format=short, tz=local)

The genesis of this patch was the documentation says that %ad
represents 'author date' without any more specific information.  I
thought that I could do

git show --date=short --pretty=format:"%ad %h"

and get the date in short form---but alas, this did not work.  So I
wrote up the patch to get a short date format.  Your ideas are much
more powerful.  I like them.

Thanks for git.

Nathan Panike