[darcs-users] More questions about the code (coslurpy and ./)

David Roundy droundy at abridgegame.org
Wed Nov 19 13:51:55 UTC 2003


On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 08:30:11AM -0800, Kevin Smith wrote:
> Ah, right. So to do a 'whatsnew' you would do something like this (which 
> is probably grossly over-simplified, but hopefully expresses the core):

Yes, that's pretty much correct.

> This begins to explain why --look-for-adds is not the default, which 
> surprised me, and which I still struggle with sometimes.

That's correct.  It's also historical, since I didn't originally have a
boring file, so --look-for-adds was pretty useless.  But definitely, the
speed issue is a good reason to keep --look-for-adds from being the
default.

> 1. Any unrecognized options should cause darcs to quit with an error. I 
> misspelled this option once, and was puzzled for a bit.

Fixed.  Turns out I wasn't checking the error value returned by GetOpt.

> 2. There doesn't seem to be a way to invert an option. So if I put 
> without that option, by putting something on the command line?

That's something that I've thought about, and would like to add at some
stage, but haven't figured out how to do cleanly.  The question is what
darcs does if it gets more than one version of the flag.  What does

darcs whatsnew --look-for-adds --dont-look-for-adds

do? I guess probably I should fail in this case and the command line should
override the defaults.  Hmmmm.  I'll have to think about it a bit more.
-- 
David Roundy
http://www.abridgegame.org




More information about the darcs-users mailing list