git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
To: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Cc: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] revision: introduce --exclude=<glob> to tame wildcards
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 06:05:40 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52256014.70203@alum.mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5224F0EE.1080205@kdbg.org>

On 09/02/2013 10:11 PM, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 31.08.2013 01:55, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
>> People often find "git log --branches" etc. that includes _all_
>> branches is cumbersome to use when they want to grab most but except
>> some.  The same applies to --tags, --all and --glob.
>>
>> Teach the revision machinery to remember patterns, and then upon the
>> next such a globbing option, exclude those that match the pattern.
>>
>> With this, I can view only my integration branches (e.g. maint,
>> master, etc.) without topic branches, which are named after two
>> letters from primary authors' names, slash and topic name.
>>
>>     git rev-list --no-walk --exclude=??/* --branches |
>>     git name-rev --refs refs/heads/* --stdin
>>
>> This one shows things reachable from local and remote branches that
>> have not been merged to the integration branches.
>>
>>     git log --remotes --branches --not --exclude=??/* --branches
>>
>> It may be a bit rough around the edges, in that the pattern to give
>> the exclude option depends on what globbing option follows.  In
>> these examples, the pattern "??/*" is used, not "refs/heads/??/*",
>> because the globbing option that follows the -"-exclude=<pattern>"
>> is "--branches".  As each use of globbing option resets previously
>> set "--exclude", this may not be such a bad thing, though.
> 
> I argued "--except should trump everything" earlier, but the case
> involving --not
> 
>   --branches --except maint --not master
> 
> to mean the same as
> 
>   --branches --except maint master
> 
> just does not make sense.
> 
> An alternative would be that --not would divide the command line
> arguments into ranges within which one --except would subtract
> subsequent refs from earlier globbing arguments in the same range.
> That's not simpler to explain than your current proposal.
> 
> So I like the relative simplicity of this approach. Here is a bit of
> documentation.
> 
> --- 8< ---
> Subject: [PATCH] document --exclude option
> 
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/rev-list-options.txt | 15 +++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
> index 5bdfb42..650c252 100644
> --- a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt
> @@ -174,6 +174,21 @@ parents) and `--max-parents=-1` (negative numbers denote no upper limit).
>  	is automatically prepended if missing. If pattern lacks '?', '{asterisk}',
>  	or '[', '/{asterisk}' at the end is implied.
>  
> +--exclude=<glob-pattern>::
> +
> +	Do not include refs matching '<glob-pattern>' that the next `--all`,
> +	`--branches`, `--tags`, `--remotes`, or `--glob` would otherwise
> +	consider. Repetitions of this option accumulate exclusion patterns
> +	up to the next `--all`, `--branches`, `--tags`, `--remotes`, or
> +	`--glob` option (other options or arguments do not clear
> +	accumlated patterns).
> ++
> +The patterns given should not begin with `refs/heads`, `refs/tags`, or
> +`refs/remotes` when applied to `--branches`, `--tags`, or `--remotes`,
> +restrictively, and they must begin with `refs/` when applied to `--glob`

s/restrictively/respectively/

> +or `--all`. If a trailing '/{asterisk}' is intended, it must be given
> +explicitly.
> +
>  --ignore-missing::
>  
>  	Upon seeing an invalid object name in the input, pretend as if
> 

It seems to me that this is growing into a language for expressing
boolean expressions without allowing terms to be combined in the full
generality that, say, a real programming language would allow.  Maybe
instead of trying to decide on the "perfect" grouping and precedence
rules, it would be clearer to allow the user to specify them.  I almost
hate to suggest it, but have you considered making the expression
"syntax" a little bit more flexible by allowing parentheses, à la
find(1), or something analogous?:

'(' --tags --except='v[0-9]*' ')' -o '(' --branches --except='mh/*' ')'

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@alum.mit.edu
http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-09-03  4:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-30  5:00 [PATCH] revision: add --except option Felipe Contreras
2013-08-30  5:40 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-08-30  6:32 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-08-30  7:17   ` Felipe Contreras
     [not found]     ` <CAPc5daVSqoE74kmsobg7RpMtiL3vzKN+ckAcWEKU_Q_wF8HYuA@mail.gmail.com>
2013-08-30  7:32       ` Felipe Contreras
2013-08-30  9:08         ` Johannes Sixt
2013-08-30 16:48         ` Junio C Hamano
2013-08-30 18:37           ` Felipe Contreras
2013-08-30 23:55           ` [PATCH] revision: introduce --exclude=<glob> to tame wildcards Junio C Hamano
2013-08-31  0:22             ` Duy Nguyen
2013-08-31  0:29               ` Junio C Hamano
2013-08-31 19:33             ` Felipe Contreras
2013-09-03 15:45               ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-03 22:03                 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-09-02 20:11             ` Johannes Sixt
2013-09-02 23:09               ` Felipe Contreras
2013-09-03  4:05               ` Michael Haggerty [this message]
2013-09-03 16:03               ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-03 20:02                 ` Johannes Sixt
2013-11-01 19:34                   ` [PATCH 0/5] ref glob exclusion follow-up Junio C Hamano
2013-11-01 19:34                     ` [PATCH 3/5] rev-list --exclude: tests Junio C Hamano
2013-11-01 19:34                     ` [PATCH 4/5] rev-list --exclude: export add/clear-ref-exclusion and ref-excluded API Junio C Hamano
2013-11-01 19:34                     ` [PATCH 5/5] rev-parse: introduce --exclude=<glob> to tame wildcards Junio C Hamano
2013-11-01 19:43                       ` Eric Sunshine
2013-11-01 20:01                         ` Junio C Hamano
2013-11-01 21:08                     ` [PATCH 0/5] ref glob exclusion follow-up Johannes Sixt
2013-08-30  7:56   ` [PATCH] revision: add --except option Johannes Sixt
2013-08-31 19:27     ` Felipe Contreras
2013-09-02  6:25       ` Johannes Sixt
2013-09-02  6:48         ` Felipe Contreras
2013-08-30  7:11 ` Johannes Sixt
2013-08-30  7:24   ` Felipe Contreras

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=52256014.70203@alum.mit.edu \
    --to=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
    --cc=felipe.contreras@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=j6t@kdbg.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).