From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Rast Subject: Re: [PATCH] add-interactive: shortcut to add hunk and quit Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 12:16:51 +0200 Message-ID: <201105191216.51709.trast@student.ethz.ch> References: <20110517071232.GA19396@mrq1.org> <4DD390AF.9020705@drmicha.warpmail.net> <7vr57wc9ja.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Michael J Gruber , Jeff King , Pete Harlan , Hermann Gausterer , git list To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 19 12:17:00 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 1QN0Hr-0004jz-VJ for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 19 May 2011 12:17:00 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751572Ab1ESKQy (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 May 2011 06:16:54 -0400 Received: from edge20.ethz.ch ([82.130.99.26]:13711 "EHLO edge20.ethz.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751323Ab1ESKQy (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 May 2011 06:16:54 -0400 Received: from CAS22.d.ethz.ch (172.31.51.112) by edge20.ethz.ch (82.130.99.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.289.1; Thu, 19 May 2011 12:16:44 +0200 Received: from thomas.inf.ethz.ch (213.55.131.180) by CAS22.d.ethz.ch (172.31.51.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.289.1; Thu, 19 May 2011 12:16:52 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/2.6.38.6-28-desktop; KDE/4.6.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <7vr57wc9ja.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Originating-IP: [213.55.131.180] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > > I think "single-key" was a poorly designed attempt to improve productivity > the ("y" )*5 into "y"*5 Actually for me it more often is y RET n RET *think* y RET s RET n RET ... > while sacrificing the safety net when you > are trying to pick and decide one by one (like the accident Thomas had > recently during "checkout -p"). If I can say "5y", think for half a second > to make sure I typed what I meant, and , to apply 5 upcoming hunks in > one go, I think I would be as efficient as the productivity optimization > the single-key offers, while still protecting me from mistakes made by fat > fingers. There's nothing stopping us from implementing number prefixes in single-key mode, since numbers do not have any meaning yet. After my little accident I'm also considering an (optional?) safety question at the end when in checkout -p mode, since it's inherently destructive. Of course that first requires changing the whole operation to be atomic. -- Thomas Rast trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch