From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:37:15 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/16] test-lib functions: add --printf option to test_commit
Message-ID: <xmqqczuvqtr8.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cRJ1j_FJcuf-T2xhPhJBWGH0_84SfbZ7V9NbSP+QdJpXQ@mail.gmail.com>

Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:

> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 7:33 AM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
> <avarab@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 13 2021, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> > Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:
>> >> I don't care for `--raw` either but couldn't think of anything better
>> >> at the time. But perhaps a name such as `--allow-escapes` would be
>> >> clearer, or perhaps not. `--c-style-escapes`?
>> >
>> > It's printf(1) style escapes ;-)
>> >
>> So, the conclusion of this thread is let's keep it as --printf?
>
> It was bikeshedding on my part, so I don't feel strongly. As
> mentioned, I only brought it up because my first thought was to wonder
> how interpolation would work. One might suggest --printf-escapes or
> --string-escapes but the audience for this is so narrow (Git
> developers) that the short and concise --printf is probably
> preferable.

After seeing you raised the issue, I wish we had a better option
name than --printf to be even more clear, but the wish is not strong
enough to make me say "let's stop until we come up with the perfect
name".  I am OK with --printf

Thanks.