From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7D58C433E0 for ; Thu, 28 May 2020 16:15:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A379521532 for ; Thu, 28 May 2020 16:15:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="N/PhxxjQ" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2404922AbgE1QPK (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 May 2020 12:15:10 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:60255 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2404861AbgE1QPG (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 May 2020 12:15:06 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFD25CC22F; Thu, 28 May 2020 12:15:04 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=kHY6AHhtW3WqNUWntb7+KldSBJ4=; b=N/Phxx jQ6sUnjmbrK8XhtCu7xpSSeZVZburixfd9zpredAyRzmpagto2dIXDZuZ1jE7Ehj /yXIyKGt6imz7J2VC0Yem9zqjj/6Ohlz2aef0gHkS+F3wzsWiCJFgPli1rdz3ORM dgN3aEKwaY8TyBoSoLa/dTXZQAu480aWasGdk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=stTd2tMrHmjGcc6/GxP2Ms4QGnKtZKWe AqcLBwZxBoyd+vMufpsSgdg0pydoAzz/ZfsRM/JLMP44S4yjSLzg0d7uuqi2k0N8 K5/Krqttok5x0y+viAL8cA4UT3GuvnqrcCaUgaf0KMgPswnP7S2QKRQ7F0wsszNA c7FxjzjYS6o= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D93BCC22E; Thu, 28 May 2020 12:15:04 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.173.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2AF96CC229; Thu, 28 May 2020 12:15:01 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Marco Trevisan via GitGitGadget" Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Marco Trevisan Subject: Re: [PATCH] completion: use native ZSH array pattern matching References: Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 09:14:59 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Marco Trevisan via GitGitGadget's message of "Tue, 26 May 2020 19:13:17 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 61DFE980-A0FE-11EA-8738-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org "Marco Trevisan via GitGitGadget" writes: > From: =?UTF-8?q?Marco=20Trevisan=20=28Trevi=C3=B1o=29?= > > When clearing the builtin operations on re-sourcing in the ZSH case we > can use the native ${parameters} associative array keys values to get > the currently `__gitcomp_builtin_*` operations using pattern matching > instead of using sed. "We can" may be a statement of fact, but by itself it does not make a convincing argument why we should have this change in our codebase. Is this change about correctness? Is it about performance? Or something else? If it is about correctness, "the current code fails in this way given this input, but with the new code the breakage is gone" would be a good justification to give in the proposed log message. If it is about performance, of course a measured performance numbers would make an objective justification that is hard to argue with, especially if you can convince people that the patch does not change the behaviour in any negative way. If it is about something else, well, there would be an appropriate way to justify the change, depending on what it is ;-) Thanks.