Thread (1 message) 1 message, 1 author, 2016-06-15

Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add proof-of-concept %[w(width,in1,in2)<<any-string>>%] implementation

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:47:34

Jakub Narebski [off-list ref] writes:
Why not

    %[w(-1,4,4)%s%+b]
Yeah.  As you said "subject unwrapped and body indented" or something like
that, I excluded that part outside the indentation, but log output indents
everything, so placing both inside %[w] would be correct.
(i.e. %+ is this empty line between subject and body, if it exists).
As %+ is to add LF iff the next expansion is non-empty, it must always be
followed by an expansion, i.e. %something.  That means "%+%something" is
unnecessary verbose and "%+something" is enough.  "%+anything" syntax,
just like "%[func()anything]" syntax, is not limited to any particular
expansion.
The %+x seems a bit strange... but I guess implementing conditional
expansion a la shell or rpn spec/queryformat would be out of question
(i.e. %?s:+ )...
Why not?

I can see us doing something like %[conditional%|iftrue%|iffalse%] quite
easily, now we have the "nested" variant of the strbuf_expand()
infrastructure.

But that is not the primary focus of the two patch series I've
demonstrated so far.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help