On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Thomas Gummerer <[email protected]> wrote:
>> +
>> +int cmd_stash(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>> +{
>> + int result = 0;
>> + pid_t pid = getpid();
>> +
>> + struct option options[] = {
>> + OPT_END()
>> + };
>> +
>> + git_config(git_default_config, NULL);
>> +
>> + xsnprintf(stash_index_path, 64, ".git/index.stash.%d", pid);
>> +
>> + argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, options, git_stash_usage,
>> + PARSE_OPT_KEEP_UNKNOWN|PARSE_OPT_KEEP_DASHDASH);
>> +
>> + if (argc < 1) {
>> + result = do_push_stash(NULL, prefix, 0, 0, 0, 0, NULL);
>> + } else if (!strcmp(argv[0], "list"))
>> + result = list_stash(argc, argv, prefix);
>> + else if (!strcmp(argv[0], "show"))
>> + result = show_stash(argc, argv, prefix);
>> + else if (!strcmp(argv[0], "save"))
>> + result = save_stash(argc, argv, prefix);
>> + else if (!strcmp(argv[0], "push"))
>> + result = push_stash(argc, argv, prefix);
>> + else if (!strcmp(argv[0], "apply"))
>> + result = apply_stash(argc, argv, prefix);
>> + else if (!strcmp(argv[0], "clear"))
>> + result = clear_stash(argc, argv, prefix);
>> + else if (!strcmp(argv[0], "create"))
>> + result = create_stash(argc, argv, prefix);
>> + else if (!strcmp(argv[0], "store"))
>> + result = store_stash(argc, argv, prefix);
>> + else if (!strcmp(argv[0], "drop"))
>> + result = drop_stash(argc, argv, prefix);
>> + else if (!strcmp(argv[0], "pop"))
>> + result = pop_stash(argc, argv, prefix);
>> + else if (!strcmp(argv[0], "branch"))
>> + result = branch_stash(argc, argv, prefix);
>> + else {
>> + if (argv[0][0] == '-') {
>> + struct argv_array args = ARGV_ARRAY_INIT;
>> + argv_array_push(&args, "push");
>> + argv_array_pushv(&args, argv);
>> + result = push_stash(args.argc, args.argv, prefix);
>
> This is a bit of a change in behaviour to what we currently have.
>
> The rules we decided on are as follows:
>
> - "git stash -p" is an alias for "git stash push -p".
> - "git stash" with only option arguments is an alias for "git stash
> push" with those same arguments. non-option arguments can be
> specified after a "--" for disambiguation.
>
> The above makes "git stash -*" a alias for "git stash push -*". This
> would result in a change of behaviour, for example in the case where
> someone would use "git stash -this is a test-". In that case the
> current behaviour is to create a stash with the message "-this is a
> test-", while the above would end up making git stash error out. The
> discussion on how we came up with those rules can be found at
> http://public-inbox.org/git/[email protected]/.
I don't really like the "argv[0][0] == '-'" logic, but it doesn't seem
to have the flaw you pointed out:
$ ./git stash -this is a test-
error: unknown switch `t'
usage: git stash [push [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-q|--quiet]
[...]
I'm not sure this is the best possible error message, but it's just as
useful as the message from the old version.
>
>> + if (!result)
>> + printf_ln(_("To restore them type \"git stash
>> apply\""));
>
> In the shell script this is only displayed when the stash_push in the
> case where git stash is invoked with no arguments, not in the push
> case if I read this correctly. So the two lines above should go in
> the (argc < 1) case I think.
I think it's correct as is. One of the tests checks for this string to
be output, and if I move the line, the test fails.
I agreed with all the other points you raised, and they will be fixed
in my next revision.
