From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Re: [PATCH 3/4] t: rev-parse-parents: avoid yoda conditions Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 19:45:19 -0400 Message-ID: <20130908234519.GA11860@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20130904171356.GD2582@serenity.lan> <20130904183559.GA3465@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130908040615.GA14019@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130908042649.GC14019@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130908050227.GG14019@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , John Keeping , Jonathan Nieder , SZEDER =?utf-8?B?R8OhYm9y?= , git@vger.kernel.org To: Felipe Contreras X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Sep 09 01:45:27 2013 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 1VIofW-0005zj-Mi for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Sep 2013 01:45:27 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750862Ab3IHXpX (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Sep 2013 19:45:23 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:49641 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750835Ab3IHXpW (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Sep 2013 19:45:22 -0400 Received: (qmail 21231 invoked by uid 102); 8 Sep 2013 23:45:22 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Sun, 08 Sep 2013 18:45:22 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 08 Sep 2013 19:45:19 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 06:25:45PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > And I do not think it is a problem. The point of the function is not to > > abstract away the idea of comparison. The point is to give a hook for > > people on systems without "diff -u" to run the test suite. > > The point according to whom? I say it's the other way around. The point according to 82ebb0b (add test_cmp function for test scripts, 2008-03-12). I wish I had simply called it test_diff back then, and then this conversation could have never occurred. > Either way the fact that others are doing it differently doesn't mean > that's the best way, that would be argumentum ad populum, and mothers > are keen to remind us that if other kids are jumping the bridge, that > doesn't mean we should too. Did I once say "my way of thinking about it is the best way"? No. I said "I think it is a matter of preference". I mentioned other systems using a particular ordering to show that the set of people who prefer it the other way is non-zero. Feel free to respond, but I have no interest in discussing this any further with you. This thread has become a giant time sink, and I have nothing else to say on the matter that I have not already said. -Peff