From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D5EE1F4BD for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 15:47:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728968AbfJBPrg (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Oct 2019 11:47:36 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:38044 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1726179AbfJBPrg (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Oct 2019 11:47:36 -0400 Received: (qmail 24968 invoked by uid 109); 2 Oct 2019 15:47:36 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Wed, 02 Oct 2019 15:47:36 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 22747 invoked by uid 111); 2 Oct 2019 15:50:13 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 02 Oct 2019 11:50:13 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 11:47:35 -0400 From: Jeff King To: SZEDER =?utf-8?B?R8OhYm9y?= Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Taylor Blau , Charles Diza , Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Revert "progress: use term_clear_line()" Message-ID: <20191002154734.GC6116@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20190822162907.GA17013@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20190916205412.8602-1-szeder.dev@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20190916205412.8602-1-szeder.dev@gmail.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 10:54:10PM +0200, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > > Yes on that final bit. We could always fall back to (4) if the terminal > > information is not available, but given that the benefit is mostly in > > simplifying the code, I don't know if it's worth carrying around _two_ > > solutions. > > Ok, so here is a patch to revert 5b12e3123b (progress: use > term_clear_line(), 2019-06-24) with proper explanation. > > As a bonus there is a new test script exercising the progress display > as well, in particular how it covers up the previous progress line, so > we may have a bit more confidence in it. Thanks for doing this. It's especially nice to get test coverage for the progress meters, which have traditionally been neglected. I'm a little late on my review, as it looks like this has already hit next, but it looks pretty good to me. My only complaint is that I think putting the new "private" bits of the progress API into the header (with a comment) is a lesser evil than re-declaring them in test-progress.c (if only because the compiler could tell us if the two get out of sync). But I can live with it either way. -Peff