Re: master 101f3cf5b9: Add support for user edits to VC command arguments

[Sean Whitton]

Hello,

On Thu 22 Sep 2022 at 06:41PM -04, Stefan Monnier wrote:

>>> This prompting seems a bit too specific to particular callers of this
>>> function, so I suggest you replace it with some kind of hook which takes
>>> the command as arg and returns the command to use instead.  It should be
>>> a `<foo>-function` with a default value of `identity`.
>>
>> Each command that uses this would have to ensure that the prompting
>> function is removed again once used, right?  How would you suggest
>> handling that?  Perhaps we could have a macro doing something like what
>> we see in vc-exec-after, `add-once-function' or something.
>
> I was thinking of having the caller simply let-bind the variable, or, as
> your code does, have the function set the var's value back to
> `identity`.
>

[...]

>
> I don't have anything in mind, I just see that you added two "hooks",
> one specifically for prompting the user to modify the command and another
> more open ended.  Currently neither subsumes the other, but I wonder if
> we couldn't provide a single hook that could satisfy both needs.

I'm attaching a refactoring attempt for review.

>>> Your commit message says:
>>>
>>>     (vc-do-async-command): Use the new hook to insert into BUFFER the
>>>     command that's next to be run.
>>>
>>> but I don't understand what this changes does.
>>> Wasn't it already inserted into BUFFER?  What's changed?
>>
>> Previously it was inserted without going via the hook.
>
> But why did you change the code so it goes via the hook?

So that it uses the user-updated value of the command, rather than the
original value.  Hopefully that is clearer in the attached.

-- 
Sean Whitton

0001-vc-git-pushpull-Restore-handling-of-vc-git-program.patch
Description: Text Data

0002-Rework-user-edits-to-VC-commands-to-use-a-more-funct.patch
Description: Text Data