Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:
I love it when I say "This shouldn't be too hard; somebody may want
to do a patch", with just a vague implemention idea in my head, and
a patch magically appears with even a better design than I had in
mind when I said it [*1*] ;-)
Having said that, I wonder if we could do a bit better.
$ git -c help.autocorrect=1 whatchange --help
WARNING: You called a Git command named 'whatchange', which does not exist.
Continuing under the assumption that you meant 'whatchanged'
in 0.1 seconds automatically...
No manual entry for gitwhatchange
We are guessing that the user meant "whatchanged"; shouldn't we be
able to feed the corrected name of the command to the machinery to
drive the manpage viewer?
From: "Junio C Hamano" <redacted>
To: "Ralf Thielow" <redacted>
Cc: <redacted>; <redacted>; <redacted>
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2016 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] help: make option --help open man pages only for Git
commands
Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
I love it when I say "This shouldn't be too hard; somebody may want
to do a patch", with just a vague implemention idea in my head, and
a patch magically appears with even a better design than I had in
mind when I said it [*1*] ;-)
Having said that, I wonder if we could do a bit better.
$ git -c help.autocorrect=1 whatchange --help
WARNING: You called a Git command named 'whatchange', which does not
exist.
Continuing under the assumption that you meant 'whatchanged'
in 0.1 seconds automatically...
No manual entry for gitwhatchange
We are guessing that the user meant "whatchanged"; shouldn't we be
able to feed the corrected name of the command to the machinery to
drive the manpage viewer?
But does it cope with the Guides? Should it cope if spelt that way?
git help revisions
git revisions --help
?
I suspect that the former should work, but not the latter, as a reasonable
approach. I just haven't checked.
The other moderately low hanging fruit is to do the (full) list of guides as
part of 'help'.
Philip