Re: [PATCH] Make "git reset" a builtin. (incomplete)

> Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> writes:
>
> > David Kastrup wrote:
> >> Carlos Rica <jasampler@gmail.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> This is the first version of the program "builtin-reset.c",
> >>> intended for replacing the script "git-reset.sh".
> >>>
> >>> The --mixed option with -- paths is not implemented yet.
> >>>
> >>> The tests I made for it are not finished so they are not included,
> >>> but it seems to pass the rest of the test suite.
> >>
> >> Could you be so kind as to give a one-sentence summary what the
> >> benefits over using a shell script would be?
> >
> > One word: Portability.
> >
> > There's a plethora of various shell syntaxes. Discerning what's
> > correct shell and what's a bash'ism that may or may not be posixly
> > correct (but perhaps not supported on a multitude of out-of-the-box
> > solaris system) has so far taken almost as much time as convincing
> > newcomers to git that there really is no point in tracking file
> > renames explicitly.
> >
> > Otoh, the list of large and renowned projects that have shunned git
> > for its weak windows support grows longer, meaning we potentially
> > lose competent programmers simply because they're forced to use
> > something else.
>
> The problem I see is that C sucks really really bad as a scripting
> language, and tying together plumbing functionality into porcelain is
> one of the most powerful, flexible and hack-friendly features of git.
> Deprecating scripts is making git more opaque.
>
> Personally, I would prefer an approach of using an embedded script
> interpreter: then language incompatibilities become a non-issue.
> git-busybox sounded like a great idea for portability.