From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [104.130.231.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F38CF14B094 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2025 03:05:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=104.130.231.41 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738638304; cv=none; b=D6cU94U0f/PMx3I/5CnH7SZYVR3kDvaGqjktq8kSPufUQUAJIv0vLlPo+82HxuPBJ8rPib6+v9O9XxJJtPGzhAWKuy/0pO6ft37789v8kaRHjG3T4p2R7QdApNDFNyR11QAds6r+17RbKRytt99f91EaZMQUKp0IdvmDmX41Zc0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738638304; c=relaxed/simple; bh=S+WkFyUKIG9QBKOQDbyW0MMJmXTcmBVfMZMa9pUEqEM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=eMegZdJFfRPnni4L7wPuQnFUJtmtKrTIKPwYd4YZHEpvPZgchNbzfXIup1srEtJHc4U3hZymbPhMbjLTM26aqhKkKHCl21tE947JN+gBR7W+9MQYa0AAJjTPVClO0XQ0fj+qzKaU2B5nJIhkiOpkpHAAtH0RX4XEnkGs3sOBmqM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=peff.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=peff.net header.i=@peff.net header.b=KYoVn7v6; arc=none smtp.client-ip=104.130.231.41 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=peff.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=peff.net header.i=@peff.net header.b="KYoVn7v6" Received: (qmail 21913 invoked by uid 109); 4 Feb 2025 03:05:02 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=peff.net; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=20240930; bh=S+WkFyUKIG9QBKOQDbyW0MMJmXTcmBVfMZMa9pUEqEM=; b=KYoVn7v6w4Sr7hNiv3CKS55JyJo4rA6GdaXUoZ/0oeEtwvkW7g9pLRhqvPyBX5p+f+uPC4C0wzVmLGU8lp7Fe6m/txgpzG39YGYDR8t7LUM2IFfqxzpSc8RHNMC+j56gZ2Hwt/OrxK1BWOvNwo6Pg9jxAW86T6flqk+rHt5KXHTYZ63p2dFBomJ6UfLcjDG/TXMaA2B1u1S/7hes2Srkxccvgork7jeMn8Cfq+sy00qKxBOfpBwgB4mafuK6Ej4vtIlwi7VvW57DepKLn81xXyXrUG2VmV8FfyjsOJUpGWFp2hqUIvZyBPxQ0C3OvUS4h1oi7ubMAdFaQnqR7Pz3kw== Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Feb 2025 03:05:02 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 30376 invoked by uid 111); 4 Feb 2025 03:05:04 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 03 Feb 2025 22:05:04 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 22:05:01 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: David Aguilar , git@vger.kernel.org, Scott Chacon , Kristoffer Haugsbakk , Johannes Schindelin , Yongmin Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] help: show the suggested command when help.autocorrect is false Message-ID: <20250204030501.GD23954@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20250201213319.153109-1-davvid@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 02:53:00PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > David Aguilar writes: > > > Make the handling of false boolean values for help.autocorrect > > consistent with the handling of value 0 by showing the suggested > > commands but not running them. > > > > Suggested-by: Junio C Hamano > > Signed-off-by: David Aguilar > > --- > > This is based on the sc/help-autocorrect-one patches from this thread > > and is in response to the open question from "What's coooking in git.git": > > > >> On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 18:51:33 -0800 Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Looking good except for "should 0 and false be 'tell it without doing it'?". > > > > source: > > > > This is what it would look like if the answer were to be, "yes". > > I obviously like the updated semantics myself. > Thanks for updating it. > > Let's see what others think. I like it (including the new "show" which is even more descriptive). -Peff