[PATCH 4 of 4] hgweb: remove now unnecessary explicit header() and footer()

Martin Geisler martin at geisler.net
Fri Aug 9 07:30:05 CDT 2013

Alexander Plavin <alexander at plav.in> writes:

> 09.08.2013, 15:30, "Martin Geisler" <martin at geisler.net>:
>> Alexander Plavin <alexander at plav.in> writes:
>>>  09.08.2013, 11:07, "Martin Geisler" <martin at geisler.net>:
>>>>  Alexander Plavin <alexander at plav.in> writes:
>>>>>   # HG changeset patch
>>>>>   # User Alexander Plavin <alexander at plav.in>
>>>>>   # Date 1374621626 -14400
>>>>>   #      Wed Jul 24 03:20:26 2013 +0400
>>>>>   # Node ID 11ac049356d4894642313803d9edc1ff2e9d2788
>>>>>   # Parent  1fe956e499f2996d4b63ae04c2ec99fe39e89302
>>>>>   hgweb: remove now unnecessary explicit header() and footer()
>>>>  I think it could be nice if you added a tiny bit of context: when and
>>>>  why did this become unnecessary (which changeset does "now" refer to)?
>>>>  My first guess would be that the immediate parent (patch 3) makes the
>>>>  functions unnecessary, but it doesn't look like it to me. So my second
>>>>  guess is that "now" refers to patch 2. That suggests that the patches
>>>>  could be reordered by swapping 3 and 4.
>>>  You are right that this depends on patch 2 only, but why reorder?
>>>  Third patch also depends on that, so it could cause the same question
>>>  as well if they were reordered :)
>> Aha... :-) I somehow thought that moving a string as you do in patch 3
>> was already supported. Maybe you could explain more clearly in patch 2
>> that it allows you to use the map file as a key-value store for plain
>> strings as well (if that is actually what patch 2 does).
> I've thought a bit about better commit message for 2nd patch now, but
> couldn't improve what's already there :) Quote from that commit:
> "allows adding arbitrarily-named entries to a template map file, and
> then referencing them" - this includes plain strings too. Any
> suggestion?

I guess the problem is that I don't know what an "arbitrarily-named
entry" is :)

It's been a long time since I looked at the map file format in detail,
but I were asked to describe it, I would describe the format as a bunch of

  key = value

lines where "value" can reference other keys. If I would have to name
one of sides "entry", I would have described the lines this:

  entry = expansion

I now get the impression that you would describe the format as:

  reference = entry

or something similar.

Martin Geisler

More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list