Karthik Nayak [off-list ref] writes:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 10:57 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Karthik Nayak [off-list ref] writes:
...
quoted
+ performed. If used with '--quote' everything in between %(align:..)
+ and %(end) is quoted.
...
I might have misunderstood you, But based on the discussion held here
(thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/276140)
I thought we wanted everything inside the %(align) .... %(end) atoms
to be quoted.
Perhaps I misunderstood your intention in the doc.
I took "everything in between %(align:...) and %(end) is quoted" to
mean that
%(if:empty)%(align)%(end)%(then)Empty%(else)Not Empty%(end)
can never satisfy %(if:empty), because %(align)%(end) would expand
to a string that has two single-quotes, that is not an empty string.
If that is not what would happen in the "branch --list" enhancement,
then the proposed behaviour is good, but the above documentation would
need to be updated when it happens, I think. It at least is misleading.
Thanks.
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 12:23 AM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Karthik Nayak [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 10:57 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Karthik Nayak [off-list ref] writes:
...
quoted
+ performed. If used with '--quote' everything in between %(align:..)
+ and %(end) is quoted.
...
I might have misunderstood you, But based on the discussion held here
(thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/276140)
I thought we wanted everything inside the %(align) .... %(end) atoms
to be quoted.
Perhaps I misunderstood your intention in the doc.
I took "everything in between %(align:...) and %(end) is quoted" to
mean that
%(if:empty)%(align)%(end)%(then)Empty%(else)Not Empty%(end)
can never satisfy %(if:empty), because %(align)%(end) would expand
to a string that has two single-quotes, that is not an empty string.
If that is not what would happen in the "branch --list" enhancement,
then the proposed behaviour is good, but the above documentation would
need to be updated when it happens, I think. It at least is misleading.
Thanks.
I'm not sure I checked this condition, will have a look at this, thanks for
pointing it out.
OK, now I checked the code, and I _think_ the recursive logic is
doing the right thing (modulo minor nits on comment-vs-code
discrepancy and code structure I sent separately).
I'm not so sure about that, I'll get back on this. (I didn't think about empty
string alignment and its effect on %(if:empty) and so on).
--
Regards,
Karthik Nayak