On 2020-12-07 at 00:30:13, Eric Sunshine wrote:

I read the commit message and looked at the implementation so I know
that this option can be specified multiple times, but this
documentation only vaguely hints at it by saying "options following
it". We could do a better job of imparting that knowledge to the
reader by saying so explicitly, perhaps like this:

    Controls the behavior of some path-printing options. If
    'absolute', [...]. If 'relative', [...]. May be specified multiple
    times, each time affecting the path-printing options which
    follow it. The default path format is option-specific.

I'll improve the documentation in v5.

Since this option can be specified multiple times, should it also
recognize `default` to request the default behavior in addition to
`absolute` and `relative`? (Genuine question. Maybe real-world
use-cases wouldn't need it, but it would be easy to support and make
it functionally complete.)

I don't think adding the default is helpful.  I can think of situations
where people want absolute path names or relative path names, but in
what case would someone want, "meh, whatever Git decides to give me"?

The problem we're solving here is that Git isn't consistent and can't be
used to provide valuable information that the user wants.  If a user
doesn't care what format the path is in, then they can always specify
absolute and it will almost certainly be correct and work for them.

Leaking `realbuf` and `prefixbuf` here.

Will fix.
-- 
brian m. carlson (he/him or they/them)
Houston, Texas, US