From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
To: Bo Yang <struggleyb.nku@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>,
Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>,
Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>,
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: Multiple line ranges and files in line level history browser
Date: Sun, 9 May 2010 16:06:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100509210654.GA1637@progeny.tock> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <p2q41f08ee11005090700xdb6070dajab0e2d77b1d0f9fc@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
Bo Yang wrote:
> git log <revision> -L1,8 -L45,+6 <file1> -L/some/,/end/ -L9,29 <file2> <file3>
I like it. It looks like paranoid script authors would have to check
for paths like ‘--’ and ‘-L’ and quote them as ‘./--’ and ‘./-L’, a
small price to pay for a nice syntax.
Unfortunately, this is completely incompatible with the existing blame
option syntax. i.e., existing scripts might do things like this:
git blame -L1,8 -C <file>
or
git blame -L1,8 <rev> <file>
Maybe there should be a line range required before every file
specifier in this syntax, to avoid trouble. Borrowing syntax from sed,
this makes
git log <rev> -L1,8 -L45,+6 <file1> -L/some/,/end/ -L9,29 <file2> -L1,$ <file3>
which is also a little clearer to look at, I think.
> 'git log -L1,8 <revision> -- -L1,8' .
This provides a single line range specifier for all files? Sounds
convenient.
# who wrote the opening comments?
git blame -L '/^[/][*]/,/^ [*][/]/' -- '*.c'
Summing up, with my refinement above, a human would parse args like
this:
When an -L option is encountered, remember the current state.
Try to parse the remaining arguments as ((-L range)* filespec)*,
where filespec has some appropriately strict meaning that forbids
‘-L’ and ‘--’. If that succeeds, we’re done.
Otherwise, rewind. Look for an upcoming ‘--’. If -- is found, any
-L arguments before the -- apply to all files specified. Unclaimed
arguments before the -- are revision specifiers.
If no -- is found either, any -L arguments before the first
unclaimed argument that is not unambiguously a revision apply to all
files specified. Arguments from that point on must be unambiguously
paths.
A little hairy. Maybe you can do better, but already it seems okay.
Maybe the last case ought to disallow multiple -L arguments and
multiple files, to encourage people to use the first syntax or an
explicit ‘--’.
Hope that helps,
Jonathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-09 21:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-09 14:00 Multiple line ranges and files in line level history browser Bo Yang
2010-05-09 18:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2010-05-11 5:43 ` Bo Yang
2010-05-12 7:57 ` Thomas Rast
2010-05-09 21:06 ` Jonathan Nieder [this message]
2010-05-10 9:31 ` Jonathan Nieder
2010-05-11 6:28 ` Bo Yang
2010-05-11 6:16 ` Bo Yang
2010-05-11 6:28 ` Jonathan Nieder
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100509210654.GA1637@progeny.tock \
--to=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=Jens.Lehmann@web.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jnareb@gmail.com \
--cc=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=struggleyb.nku@gmail.com \
--cc=trast@student.ethz.ch \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).