Re: [PATCH v2] rebase -x: don't print "Executing:" msgs with --quiet

Phillip Wood [off-list ref] writes:

On 18/08/2024 14:03, Matheus Tavares Bernardino wrote:

quoted

...
term_clean_line()", the correct approach would be to modify
"term_clean_line()" to return earlier "if (!isatty(1))". What do you
think?

On the face of it that sounds like a good idea but I haven't thought
too much about it. These messages are all going to stderr rather than
stdout. If we do go that way we'll need to adjust
launch_specified_editor() in editor.c to either suppress the hint or
terminate it with '\n' if stderr is not a terminal.

Right.

The true reason why I brought it up was because (1) it looked really
funny to avoid doing that term_clean_line() under "--verbose" as
well as under "--quiet" and the code should explain what reasoning
backs such decision but it did not, and (2) that unexplained funny
pattern repeated, which probably was a sign that it needed to become
a small helper function with descriptive name to encapsulate the
logic to decide when to call and when not to call the clean-line,
which as a bonus would give a central place for us to explain the
reason behind not cleaning the line under "--verbose" and the same
for "--quiet" (as I suspect that these two want to omit the call for
different reasons).

Thanks.