Re: Suggestion for the "Did you mean this?" feature

[Kaartic Sivaraam <kaarticsivaraam91196@gmail.com>]

Hello all,

On Sun, 18 December 2016 at 20:59, Alexei Lozovsky wrote,
> It's definitely a good thing for human users. For example, I am
> annoyed
> from time to time when I type in some long spell, mistype one minor
> thing,
> and the whole command fails. Then I need to press <up>, correct the
> obvious typo, and run the command again.
> 
> Though, there is one aspect which may be the reason why git does not
> have
> this feature: it requires interactive input. For example, it won't
> work
> if some script tries to run an invalid git command. And git cannot
> really
> tell whether it is running interactively or in a batch mode. If it is
> running in batch mode then the whole script may hang indefinitely
> waiting
> for nonexistent input. This also may apply to using git with pipes.
> 
> Maybe a configuration option or some GIT_NO_PROMPT environment
> variable
> may be used to force disable this, but it still will be a hassle for
> the
> scripts.

This is a good point that I didn't think of, sir. Thanks for bringing
it up. It seems that in some other form git does have the feature I was
suggesting.


On Mon, 2016-12-19 at 13:48 +1300, Chris Packham wrote:
> This feature already exists (although it's not interactive). See
> help.autoCorrect in the git-config man page. "git config
> help.autoCorrect -1" should to the trick.
Thanks for bringing this to notice, sir. I wasn't aware of it before.
It's in essence the same feature.


On Mon, 2016-12-19 at 12:01 -0500, Marc Branchaud wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Marc Branchaud <marcnarc@xiplink.com>
> ---
> 
> Awesome, I was unaware of this feature.  Thanks!
> 
> I found the message it prints a bit awkward, so here's a patch to fix
> it up.
> 
> Instead of:
> 
>    WARNING: You called a Git command named 'lgo', which does not
> exist.
>    Continuing under the assumption that you meant 'log'
>    in 1.5 seconds automatically...
> 
> it's now:
> 
>    WARNING: You called a Git command named 'lgo', which does not
> exist.
>    Continuing in 1.5 seconds under the assumption that you meant
> 'log'.
Happy that my mail introduced a little change to git by revealing a not
often used feature.

-- 


Regards,
Kaartic