Re: [PATCH v2] completion: add new git_complete helper

[Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> I am OK with introducing git_ps1 while keeping __git_ps1 as an equivalent
>> and declare that git_$anything will be the surface interface for end users
>> to *use* the machinery we provide, though.
>
> The problem is that completion scripts are often included implicitly
> in .profile through the bash completion machinery.  Users do not have
> to explicitly ask for them, so there is no reason for users to expect
> that the function name "more_cowbell" is dangerous to use in .profile
> because some day the completion script for the "more" command will
> start using it.

Sure, that's why we would have _git_cowbell instead, so for *most* of
functions the user would have no trouble, it would *only* be
git_completion the one without prefix, and I think the name is quite
safe. There's quite likely few, probably nobody, actually using that
function name in their profiles.

Also, the script would now be loaded only *after*, the user types 'git
<TAB>'. And there's already a bunch of functions that are already
exported by just having bash completion: have(), quote(), dequote(),
quote_readline(). And there's at least one script that uses a function
without a prefix: ri_get_methods()

I would like to see a completion script that actually has a function
supposed to be exported and that still uses the _ prefix anyway.

Cheers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras