Hey Pranit,

On 12/06/2016 10:14 PM, Pranit Bauva wrote:

quoted

quoted

+
+     if (argc == 0) {
+             printf(_("Your current terms are %s for the old state\nand "
+                    "%s for the new state.\n"), terms->term_good,
+                    terms->term_bad);

Very minor: It improves the readability if you'd split the string after
the \n and put the "and "in the next line.

Ah. This is because of the message. If I do the other way, then it
won't match the output in one of the tests in t/t6030 thus, I am
keeping it that way in order to avoid modifying the file t/t6030.

I think I was unclear here. I was referring to the coding/layouting
style, not to the string. I mean like writing:

	printf(_("Your current terms are %s for the old state\n"
	         "and "%s for the new state.\n"),
	       terms->term_good, terms->term_bad);

The string fed to _() is the same, but it is split in a different (imho
more readable) way: after the "\n", not after the "and ".

quoted

quoted

+                     die(_("invalid argument %s for 'git bisect "
+                               "terms'.\nSupported options are: "
+                               "--term-good|--term-old and "
+                               "--term-bad|--term-new."), argv[i]);

Hm, "return error(...)" and "die(...)" seems to be quasi-equivalent in
this case. Because I am always looking from a library perspective, I'd
prefer "return error(...)".

I should use return error()

When you reroll your patches, please also check if you always put _()
around your error()s ;) (Hmmm... On the other hand, it might be arguable
if translations are useful for errors that only occur when people hack
git-bisect or use the bisect--helper directly... This makes me feel like
all those errors should be prefixed by some "BUG: " marker since the
ordinary user only sees them when there is a bug. But I don't feel in
the position to decide or recommend such a thing, so it's just a thought.)

~Stephan