Re: [PATCH 07/12] completion: simplify command stuff

From: "SZEDER Gábor" <szeder@ira.uka.de>
To: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org>,
	Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
	Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/12] completion: simplify command stuff
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 01:01:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120411230157.GV2289@goldbirke> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMP44s3hYHxs2HZ59meEO=SU7gXuxU=m489LdxV38=7PDeDFdw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 01:21:17AM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> 2012/4/12 SZEDER Gábor <szeder@ira.uka.de>:
> > However, this change "promotes" the command (or cmd) variable from
> > being just a variable in _git() to a variable that is used in other
> > completion functions, too.  Why not go one more step further, and
> > denote this by adding a __git prefix (i.e. renaming the variable to
> > __git_command)?
> 
> After thinking more about it, and analyzing the next patches, I don't
> think it makes sense to have such a variable; it's only used by
> __git_complete_remote_or_refspec, and it would be easier to make it an
> argument to that function; that would simplify this patch series a
> lot.

You mean that _git_fetch() would call

  __git_complete_remote_or_refspec "fetch"

while _git_pull() and _git_push() will pass "pull" and "push",
respectively?

Best,
Gábor