Stefan Beller writes:
>> Ahh, I was an idiot (call it vacation-induced-brain-disfunction). I
>> forgot about 0f1930c5 ("parse-options: allow positivation of options
>> starting, with no-", 2012-02-25), which may have already made your
>> new use of "--no-verify" in
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
>> Stefan Beller writes:
>>
>>> This patch disallows all no- options, but we could be more open and allow
>>> --no-options that have the NO_NEG bit set.
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> This patch disallows all no- options, but we could be more open and allow
>> --no-options that have the NO_NEG bit set.
>
> "--no-foo" that does not take "--foo" is perhaps OK so should not
> trigger
Stefan Beller writes:
> This patch disallows all no- options, but we could be more open and allow
> --no-options that have the NO_NEG bit set.
"--no-foo" that does not take "--foo" is perhaps OK so should not
trigger an error.
A ("--no-foo", "--foo") pair is better
When compiling with -DDEVELOPER set (enabled via the Makefile DEVELOPER
switch), inspect options if they are negated and warn about them.
1. Negated options are usually are problem down the maintenance road:
When a new negated option ("--no-foo") is introduced, then the option
can be
5 matches
Mail list logo