On 09/09/14 22:45, Jeff King wrote:
Yeah, that was my thought on reading the initial patch, too. Why limit ourselves to newlines and spaces. I'd much rather have full conditional expansion, like "${foo:+prefix $foo suffix}" in the shell.Something like the patch below might work, but I didn't test it very thoroughly (and note the comments, which might need dealing with). Maybe it would make a sensible base for Harry to build on if he wants to pursue this.
I definitely prefer your more general solution to my bare-minimum-to-scratch-itch patch. I'd certainly be willing to take your patch and expand upon it (pun unintended) once Junio has weighed in on your suggestions.
You could also make "%d" more flexible with it. We unconditionally include the " (...)" wrapper when expanding it. But assuming we introduced a "%D" that is _just_ the decoration names, you could do: %if(%D, (%D)) to get the same effect with much more flexibility.
Regardless of what happens with the conditional expansion I think it would definitely be a useful addition to be able to print the decorators without the " (...)" wrapper. I think it's general enough that it'd warrant its own separate patch rather than being part of a patch series for the conditional expansion.
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
