From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/18] Extending the shelf-life of "git describe" output Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 16:24:52 -0400 Message-ID: <20120703202452.GA24984@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1341268449-27801-1-git-send-email-gitster@pobox.com> <20120703071940.GB16679@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7v3958wvtx.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20120703183839.GA5765@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vy5n0vg9l.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20120703193410.GA20503@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vtxxotx2n.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 03 22:25:03 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Sm9ee-0008T4-Sp for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2012 22:25:01 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756025Ab2GCUY4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2012 16:24:56 -0400 Received: from 99-108-225-23.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.225.23]:52533 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751409Ab2GCUYz (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2012 16:24:55 -0400 Received: (qmail 25740 invoked by uid 107); 3 Jul 2012 20:25:02 -0000 Received: from c-71-206-173-132.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.206.173.132) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Tue, 03 Jul 2012 16:25:02 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 03 Jul 2012 16:24:52 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vtxxotx2n.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 Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 01:21:36PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > What happens if I set multiple flags? One or more of them will be > > ignored (you _could_ try to establish a hierarchy, for example that > > TREEISH is a superset of COMMITISH, but that could not handle the *_only > > cases, which really are mutually exclusive). IOW, I think these are not > > really flags but rather enum elements. > > Yes, I was aware of that. I counted five useful ones (see the new > ones near the tip of 'pu') but there may be others, so you cannot > fit in 2 bits and would need 3 bits. I am not worried about the bits, only that adding a new 'enum disambiguation_type' parameter would be a pain, as most places would just be passing 0. But it would enforce the mutual exclusion at compile time. > I actually am thinking to move these bit assignments backto > sha1_name.c and make them private, as get_sha1_tree() and friends > are easier to understand public interface functions than > get_sha1_typish(... I_WANT_COMMIT|I_WANT_COMMITTISH|...). Yeah, I think that might be sane. If you really wanted to be flexible anyway, you would let the caller pass a custom disambiguation function (which I suspect describe would want for handling the "must come at this point in the history" rule). -Peff