Re: [PATCH v8] ls-files: introduce "--format" option

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
Cc: "ZheNing Hu via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org,
	"Christian Couder" <christian.couder@gmail.com>,
	"Phillip Wood" <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>,
	"Torsten Bögershausen" <tboegi@web.de>,
	"ZheNing Hu" <adlternative@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8] ls-files: introduce "--format" option
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:23:10 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqsfmuidmp.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <220721.86ilnqtq8f.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?IsOG?= =?utf-8?B?dmFyIEFybmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Thu, 21 Jul 2022 17:54:07 +0200")

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:

>>>       +test_expect_success 'git ls-files --format objectmode v.s. -s' '
>>>      -+	git ls-files -s | awk "{print \$1}" >expect &&
>>>      ++	git ls-files -s >files &&
>>>      ++	cut -d" " -f1 files >expect &&
>>
>> Either "awk" or "cut" is fine and flipping between them is a bit
>> distracting.  Cutting the pipe into two is a good move.
>
> That "cut" suggestion saw mine, sorry about the churn...

As I said "cut" is perfectly fine.  Unless this part goes away,
(i.e. perhaps we may decide that it is a bad idea to check only the
pieces of lines), let's not flip back to awk ;-)

>> 	format="%(objectmode) %(objectname) %(stage)	%(path)" &&
>> 	git ls-files -s >expect &&
>> 	git ls-files --format="$format" >actual &&
>> 	test_cmp expect actual
>>
>> I do not know if the $format I wrote without looking at the doc is
>> correct, but you get the idea.
>
> Past rounds moved some tests towards that, maybe that's a good thing
> here too I didn't look deeply this time around...

OK, thanks for reviewing.