From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Teach 'git grep' about --open-files-in-pager=[] Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:33:03 -0400 Message-ID: <20100326203303.GB22900@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20100326124650.GA12215@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Mar 26 21:33:16 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvGDU-0001s7-Dx for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 21:33:16 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752640Ab0CZUdL (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:33:11 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:49480 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752070Ab0CZUdK (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:33:10 -0400 Received: (qmail 5337 invoked by uid 107); 26 Mar 2010 20:33:42 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:33:42 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:33:03 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 05:14:46PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > In addition to the disadvantages you are listing, it does not jump > directly to the word I am looking for. As you know, I am working > with LaTeX files heavily, where convention dictates that a paragraph is > represented by a single line in the source code. Sure, that is a reasonable feature to want that my solution did not have (though I have never seen LaTeX code with that requirement; I wrap my lines at a reasonable width and separate paragraphs with a blank line). > So yes, I really need -O, and if a colleague would not have asked me why > this useful feature is not in upstream Git, I would not even have > submitted the patch pair. Yep. That is why I started my mail with "this is not an argument against your patch". I was just trying to be helpful and offer a possible alternative. -Peff