> On 07 Dec 2017, at 18:37, Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thursday 07 December 2017 10:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> +
>> + if (print_waiting_for_editor) {
>> + /*
>> + * A dumb terminal cannot erase the line later on. Add a
>> + * newline to separate the hint from subsequent output.
>> + *
>
>
>> + * In case the editor emits further cruft after what
>> + * we wrote above, separate it from our message with SP.
>
> I guess this part of the comment could be improved a little. I currently
> interpret it as "See if the editor emits further cruft, print a space in that
> case". Though, it's not what we are doing. Something like the following,
> perhaps?
>
> In a non-dumb terminal, separate our message from further cruft
> that might be emitted by the editor with SP.
I see what you mean. My (non-native) language feeling tells me that
reordering the sentence might sound better:
* In a non-dumb terminal, separate our message
with SP
* from further cruft that might be emitted by
the editor.
@Junio: If you agree with the change, can you squash either of the new
versions?
Thanks,
Lars
