Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > 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. > > With it, you can do: > > git log --format='%h %s%if(%d,%n Decoration:%d)' origin > ... > 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.
Yup. I do not think we need to go overboard to support nesting and stuff, let alone turing completeness ;-), especially when we are going to test the condition part only for emptyness. Even with this simple patch, I sense that we are near a slipperly slope of wanting to add %unless(%d, ) or %ifelse(%d,%d, \(undefined\)), so I am not 100% convinced yet. -- 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
