Hi Peff,
On Tue, 30 Apr 2019, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 07:40:06PM -0400, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > And I also tried pretty hard to *not* bleed any internal state of
> > `add-interactive` into `builtin/add`, as I wanted the new code to be
> > as libified as possible (in a
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 07:40:06PM -0400, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > Yeah, I agree this split seems a bit more natural. It is worth
> > propagating errors from add_i_config(), though, like:
> >
> > if (add_i_config(var, value, data))
> > return -1;
> >
> > so that any key-specific errors
Hi Jeff & Jeff,
On Thu, 18 Apr 2019, Jeff King wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:31:30AM -0400, Jeff Hostetler wrote:
>
> > Currently, neither function looks at any other k/v pairs, so
> > this is a bit of a moot point, but I'm wondering if this should
> > look like this:
> >
> > int add_co
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:31:30AM -0400, Jeff Hostetler wrote:
> Currently, neither function looks at any other k/v pairs, so
> this is a bit of a moot point, but I'm wondering if this should
> look like this:
>
> int add_config(...)
> {
> // give add-interactive.c a chance to lo
On 4/10/2019 1:37 PM, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote:
From: Johannes Schindelin
This is hardly the first conversion of a Git command that is implemented
as a script to a built-in. So far, the most successful strategy for such
conversions has been to add a built-in helper and call
From: Johannes Schindelin
This is hardly the first conversion of a Git command that is implemented
as a script to a built-in. So far, the most successful strategy for such
conversions has been to add a built-in helper and call that for more and
more functionality from the script, as more and more
6 matches
Mail list logo
