Re: [RFC] Should "log --cc" imply "log --cc -p"?

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 08:36:43AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> "git log/diff-files -U8" do not need "-p" to enable textual patches,
> for example.  It is "I already told you that I want 8-line context.
> For what else, other than showing textual diff, do you think I told
> you that for?" and replacing "8-line context" with various other
> options that affect patch generation will give us a variety of end
> user complaints that would tell us that C) is more intuitive to
> them.

Yeah, I'd agree with this. My feeling is that when there are two
options, A and B, and A is a no-op if B is not also specified, that it
makes sense for A to imply B. We do it in several places already (and I
just added some for "git branch --list" recently).

Is "--cc" a no-op when "-p" is not specified? Certainly "-c" is not, but
I do not think you are proposing that. At first glance, "--cc" is
nonsensical without "-p", but what about other xdiff callers? For
example, in:

  git log --cc --stat

the "--cc" is significant. So I don't think it is right for "--cc" to
always imply "-p". But if the rule kicked in only when no other format
had been specified, that might make sense.

-Peff