I haven't tested the patch, but the code looks clean and I look forward to a feature like this.
But I have some questions. How general is this approach? It looks like you've added this 'check' in one place so far. Do you think you could generalize this to a prehook? That is, all commands can run a script and check the exit code before the darcs command succeeds. If you did it this way, I think your check could be a special case. If this interests you, David explained how to do this for posthooks to me once on the mail list. The biggest problem with this appoarch is that it may be harder to do per-patch actions. And perhaps whether it's per patch or per invocation of darcs should be commandline flag. Does this preserve atomticity? That is, are all patches checked before darcs decides to accept the patches or is it patch by patch and can fail in the middle? I'd say the former is the correct behavior, but that also implies that the 'check' functionality only generates intermediate results and then you run something after darcs succeeds on the output. Which leads me to my point. We could use more documentation about example real-world use of this command. Keep up the good work, I think this functionality is much needed. Thanks, Jason On 5/9/06, Tony Garnock-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tue May 9 20:46:39 BST 2006 Tony Garnock-Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Add "--[no-]check-patch" option and "checkpatch" pref for darcs record. _______________________________________________ darcs-devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
_______________________________________________ darcs-devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
