[RFC] bzr.jrydberg.versionedfile

[John Arbash Meinel]

Johan Rydberg wrote:
> John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> writes:
> 
> 
>>So we are talking about ~10% overhead to be able to read the knit in a
>>text editor. I'm willing to make that trade.
> 
> 
> So am I.

Do we have any dissenters?

> 
> 
>>Also, I wanted to bring up the 'incomplete' marking in the index. It
>>makes it seem like there is something missing in the entry. I think
>>using "noeol" or something like that would be better. It is shorter,
>>which is good, but more importantly it doesn't sound scary. :)
> 
> 
> The word comes from the terminology that patch uses.  They call a line
> without a line-ending a "incomplete line."  I thought
> 'incomplete-line' was too long.  But you might be right, something
> like 'no-eol' could be better.  Not that users should look in the
> index files.

I would support 'no-eol'.

I haven't seen the 'incomplete line', but that specific index location
seems to me more of a description of the whole text, not just the last line.
I've only seen diff's 'No newline':

$ echo -n "foo" > a
$ echo "foo" > b
$ diff -u a b
--- a   2005-12-21 09:26:50.000000000 -0600
+++ b   2005-12-21 09:26:58.000000000 -0600
@@ -1 +1 @@
-foo
\ No newline at end of file
+foo

> 
> ~j

vim uses 'noeol' in the status bar when it opens files without a
terminating newline. So I'm pretty used to seeing it. 'no-eol' is
definitely easier to read. Though maybe 'no-enl' No Ending NewLine. But
I would go with vim's because people will probably recognize it.

John
=:->
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 256 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20051221/042785cc/attachment.pgp