[darcs-devel] should --look-for-adds imply --summary ?
Alexander Staubo
alex at byzantine.no
Sun Mar 13 10:04:15 PST 2005
Sorry to butt in late. I'll give you a use case for when it *isn't*
silly -- scripting.
If the behaviour isn't symmetric, then scripts are harder to write. Does
the suggested change (-l implies -s) mean that you *can* do
"--look-for-adds --no-summary" and still get the right behaviour?
If so, this is fine with me. Although I like consistency, and that
"darcs what -l" and "darcs what -sl" produce different output is, to me,
expected. Principle of the least surprise and all that.
I'm also asking because I'm scripting Darcs from Java, and I'm already
being tripped by something unexpected:
$ darcs what -s
M ./bar.txt +1
$ darcs what -sl
a ./foo.txt
To me, the latter command should work like this:
$ darcs what -sl
M ./bar.txt +1
a ./foo.txt
In other words, "--summary --look-for-adds" should show the usual
summary *and* list additional adds. At the moment -l actually makes
Darcs filter out anything except adds. Bug? Feature? I can't tell.
This is Darcs 1.0.2.
Alexander.
Mark Stosberg wrote:
> On 2005-02-25, David Roundy <droundy at abridgegame.org> wrote:
>
>>But I'm not sure what kind of a crazy person would use -l without
>>-s... wouldn't that just give way too much output anyways?
>
>
> I think "-l" without -s" /is/ silly. I don't know that CVS had a command
> lik thate (and I didn't miss it there either!).
>
> So why not make --look-for-adds imply --summary ?
>
> Then we could all save a keystroke for a common command. :)
>
> darcs whatsnew -l
>
> Mark
>
More information about the darcs-devel
mailing list