Re: [PATCH 0/3] Generalized "string function" syntax

René Scharfe [off-list ref] writes:

Junio C Hamano schrieb:
...

quoted

I was more worried about painting ourselves now in a corner we cannot get
out of easily later.  Even if my answer to question "what are we going to
add" may be "nothing I can think of right now", it does not make me happy.

If wrapping wasn't implemented as a nested function, nesting could still
be introduced independently and used for other things -- once these
other things arrive.

True.  I do not think we _need_ nested expansion; obviously we have lived
without it for a long time.

I'm more in favour of adding ways to customize the shape of the elements
rather than adding string functions.  %S(width=76,indent=4) over
%[wrap(76,4)%s%].

Yeah, %X(some modifier) that can apply to any 'X' looks much simpler and
easier to look at.  The way the code is structured currently it might be
more work and risk to break things, though.