Re: [PATCH v11 20/22] stash: convert `stash--helper.c` into `stash.c`

> Paul-Sebastian Ungureanu <ungureanupaulsebastian@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > The old shell script `git-stash.sh`  was removed and replaced
> > entirely by `builtin/stash.c`. In order to do that, `create` and
> > `push` were adapted to work without `stash.sh`. For example, before
> > this commit, `git stash create` called `git stash--helper create
> > --message "$*"`. If it called `git stash--helper create "$@"`, then
> > some of these changes wouldn't have been necessary.
> >
> > This commit also removes the word `helper` since now stash is
> > called directly and not by a shell script.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paul-Sebastian Ungureanu <ungureanupaulsebastian@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  .gitignore                           |   1 -
> >  Makefile                             |   3 +-
> >  builtin.h                            |   2 +-
> >  builtin/{stash--helper.c => stash.c} | 157 +++++++++++++++------------
> >  git-stash.sh                         | 153 --------------------------
> >  git.c                                |   2 +-
> >  6 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 226 deletions(-)
> >  rename builtin/{stash--helper.c => stash.c} (91%)
> >  delete mode 100755 git-stash.sh
> 
> Seeing the recent trouble in "rebase in C" and how keeping the
> scripted version as "git legacy-rebase" helped us postpone the
> rewritten version without ripping the whole thing out, I wonder if
> we can do the same here.

> Also, the remaining two patches should be done _before_ this step, I
> would think.  I can understand it if the reason you have those two
> after this step is because you found the opportunity for these
> improvements after you wrote this step, but in the larger picture
> seen by the end users of the "stash in C" and those developers who
> follow the evolution of the code, the logical place for this "now we
> have everything in C, we retire the scripted version" step to happen
> is at the very end.
> 
> Thanks.
>