On 01/30, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Thomas Gummerer <t.gumme...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Introduce a new git stash push verb in addition to git stash save. The
> > push verb is used to transition from the current command line arguments
> > to a more conventional way, in which the message is specified after a -m
> > parameter instead of being a positional argument.
>
> I think the canonical way to express that is "... the message is
> given as an argument to the -m option" (i.e. some options take an
> argument, some others do not, and the "-m" takes one).
>
> > This allows introducing a new filename argument to stash single files.
>
> I do not want them to be "a filename argument", and I do not think
> you meant them as such, either.
>
> This allows us to have pathspecs at the end of the command line
> arguments like other Git commands do, so that the user can say
> which subset of paths to stash (and leave others behind).
Yeah, this is much better, thanks.
> > +save_stash () {
> > + push_options=
> > + while test $# != 0
> > + do
> > + case "$1" in
> > + -k|--keep-index)
> > +...
> > + esac
> > + shift
> > + done
>
> It is a bit unfortunate that we need to duplicate the above
> case/esac here. I do not know if doing it this way:
>
> case "$1" in
> --)
> shift
> break
> ;;
> --help)
> show_help
> ;;
> -*)
> # pass all options through to push_stash
> push_options="$push_options $1"
> ;;
> *)
> break
> ;;
> esac
>
> and letting push_stash complain for an unknown option is easier to
> maintain.
I think this will work out nicely. Will try to implement it this way.
> You are reversing the order of the options in the loop. Don't.
--
Thomas
