From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:02:10 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH][GSoC] parse-options: Add OPT_SET_INT_NONEG.
Message-ID: <xmqq61njmea5.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGqt0zyPOGY18EhWPMTGdtU54NDYS0ppRHhemhDArX7oE-0LGw@mail.gmail.com>

Yuxuan Shui <yshuiv7@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:30 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> By convention, no full stop in the subject line. The subject should
>>> summarize your changes and "add ..NONEG" is just one part of it. The
>>> other is "convert to use ...NONEG". So I suggest "parse-options:
>>> convert to use new macro OPT_SET_INT_NONEG()" or something like that.
>>>
>>> You should also explain in the message body (before Signed-off-by:)
>>> why this is a good thing to do. My guess is better readability and
>>> harder to make mistakes in the future when you have to declare new
>>> options with noneg.
>>
>> As I said elsewhere, I am not sure if doubling the number of
>> OPT_<type> macros as your micro suggestion proposes is the right
>> solution to the problem.
>>
>> What are we trying to solve?
>
> OK, I'll switch to another micro project.

That is fine, but note that it was not an objection but was a pure
question. I was asking you to explain why this is a good change.