On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes:
>
>> (Though wondering for non-submodule users, if they perceive it as
>> inconsistency as other parts of the code may not follow the rigorous quoting)
>
> Do you mean that we may instead want to remove the excessive quoting
> of branch names and stuff from submodule.c code, because they are
> newer ones that broke the consistency existed before them (i.e. not
> quoting)?
No, I do not. I was just wondering if a non-submodule user
may see differences between different commands now.
For example "checkout -b" already quotes 'external data', which
would be inline with this proposal, but there may be others.
My question was rather an encouragement to check the code base
if there are other occurrences left that do not quote.
In an ideal code base we could just grep for any %s that has no
surrounding quotes, but of course it is not as easy in the real world:
* some outputs use %s construction for non-human consumption
in e.g. the diff machinery
* sometimes we play sentence lego, stringing words together
which also is using %s unquoted correctly.
> That certainly is tempting, but I personally find it easier to read
> a message that marks parts that holds "external data" differently
> from the message's text, so I think this patch 2/2 goes in the right
> direction.
Yes. I like the direction this patch is going.
A note on 'external data':
For branchs, paths, submodule names a single quote seems
to be best (my opinion), whereas in e.g. git-status:
Submodule 'sm1' 0000000...1beffeb (new submodule)
parens seem to do a better job as they describe the state,
not reproducing external data. (This is also the place
where I was reminded of potential sentence lego)
