Re: [PATCH 3/4] completion: reflog with implicit "show"

> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 17:46:20 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
> >     $ git reflog sho<TAB>
> >     shot show
> > 
> > That is what I would expect.    
> 
> Thank you for responding.
> 
> Of course that's the logical expectation.
> 
> However I'm not sure if it is sensible to offer completion for
> sub-commands mixed with branch names.
> 
> Furthermore, I am also worried that such an approach implies making the
> user pay, probably unnecessarily many times, for __git_complete_refs in
> cases such as:
> 
>     $ git reflog <TAB><TAB>  ;# the user may be just exploring the sub-commands
>     $ git reflog s<TAB>      ;# the user may be lazy and just want "show "
>     $ git reflog show<TAB>   ;# likewise, to complete the SP
>     $ git reflog expir<TAB>  ;# how often a expir... branch is expected here?
> 
> The experienced user, if not most users, should be intuitive enough to
> circumvent the corner cases:
> 
>     $ git reflog <TAB><TAB>
>     delete expire show
>     ...
>     $ git reflog s<TAB>
>     ...
>     $ git reflog show s<TAB>
>     ...
>     $ git reflog show shot
> 
> This is why I choose to fallback to __git_complete_ref only when no
> other option is available.
> 
> If you think, or anyone else, that these concerns don't make sense, I'm
> open to make it work as you described.