From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Fwd: [PATCH 2/2] pretty.c: allow date formats in user format strings Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:31:48 -0500 Message-ID: <20110310223148.GD15828@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20110305195020.GA3089@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20110305200010.GB32095@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20110307161758.GB11934@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7v39mw9f7a.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Dietmar Winkler , Will Palmer , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Mar 10 23:31:58 2011 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 1PxoOi-0006ja-TT for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 23:31:57 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753294Ab1CJWbu (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:31:50 -0500 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:59825 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753199Ab1CJWbt (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:31:49 -0500 Received: (qmail 31789 invoked by uid 107); 10 Mar 2011 22:32:20 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:32:20 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:31:48 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7v39mw9f7a.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 01:06:17PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Agreed. And I think it is possible to do it in a backwards-compatible > > way; support %(longname:options) for everything, and keep short-hands > > like %h and %ad for existing elements without options. > > Yes, I think %( is not taken in the pretty-format language, so we should > be able to do this. > > I wanted to take your earlier "'%ad' or '%ad(format)'" patch but refrained > from doing so. The above line of reasoning is much better for the long > term health of the project. OK. Do you want me to throw away the %ad(format) patch for now, then, in favor of building it on top of a more sane syntax? I had originally planned to do %ad(format) for now, and then worry about syntax later. Since we already have a variety of of other placeholders with similar syntax (e.g., %w(), %C()). But I don't care too much either way; it is not a feature I personally wanted, so delay doesn't bother me. Dietmar (the original requestor) may feel differently, of course. :) -Peff