Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] parse-options: introduce `OPTION_UNSIGNED`

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 16, 2025, 18:50 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqwmbkgcu5.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <20250416-b4-pks-parse-options-integers-v3-5-d390746bea79@pks.im>

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

> We have two generic ways to parse integers in the "parse-options"
> subsystem:
>
>   - `OPTION_INTEGER` parses a signed integer.
>
>   - `OPTION_MAGNITUDE` parses an unsigned integer, but it also
>     interprets suffixes like "k" or "g".
>
> Notably missing is a middle ground that parses unsigned integers without
> interpreting suffixes. Introduce a new `OPTION_UNSIGNED` option type to
> plug this gap. This option type will be used in subsequent commits.

This takes a turn in a bit unexpected direction. Because the way to spell a scaled quantity is unambiguous in the sense that anything that used to be parsed with OPT_INTEGER() couldn't have had anything but "^-?[0-9]+$", an obvious alternative is to teach OPTION_INTEGER to always allow the scaling suffix if the user wants to use one, without adding a new "only numbers but this one does not even allow a sign" variant.

Seriously, are there good candidates for an option where we want to absolutely refuse to take scaling suffix and insist only on a bare number?