Re: [PATCH/RFC] git.c: support "!!" aliases that do not move cwd

From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
To: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
Cc: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
	Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] git.c: support "!!" aliases that do not move cwd
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 20:07:54 +0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACsJy8A9VBA_1aGd9R07OBfO7E0hrNVZT0ajjVAkGeg3AK91WQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <vpqmvig5ns6.fsf@anie.imag.fr>

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Matthieu Moy
<Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
> Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Johannes Schindelin
>> <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
>>> Hi Junio,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 6 Oct 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy  <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>> > Throwing something at the mailing list to see if anybody is
>>>> > interested.
>>>> >
>>>> > Current '!' aliases move cwd to $GIT_WORK_TREE first, which could
>>>> > make
>>>> > handling path arguments hard because they are relative to the
>>>> > original
>>>> > cwd. We set GIT_PREFIX to work around it, but I still think it's
>>>> > more
>>>> > natural to keep cwd where it is.
>>>> >
>>>> > We have a way to do that now after 441981b (git: simplify
>>>> > environment
>>>> > save/restore logic - 2016-01-26). It's just a matter of choosing
>>>> > the
>>>> > right syntax. I'm going with '!!'. I'm not very happy with it.
>>>> > But I
>>>> > do like this type of alias.
>>>>
>>>> I do not know why you are not happy with the syntax, but I
>>>> personally think it brilliant, both the idea and the preliminary
>>>> clean-up that made this possible with a simple patch like this.
>>>
>>> I guess he is not happy with it because "!!" is quite unintuitive a
>>> construct. I know that *I* would have been puzzled by it, asking
>>> "What the
>>> heck does this do?".
>>
>> Yep. And I wouldn't want to set a tradition for the next alias type
>> '!!!'. There's no good choice to represent a new alias type with a
>> leading symbol. This just occurred to me, however, what do you think
>> about a new config group for it? With can have something like
>> externalAlias.* (or some other name) that lives in parallel with
>> alias.*. Then we don't need '!' (or '!!') at all.
>
> Another possibility: !(nocd), which leaves room
> for !(keyword1,keyword2,...) if needed later. Also, it is consistent
> with the :(word) syntax of pathspecs.

This seems to solve my problem nicely.
-- 
Duy