Support for line range plus syntax #1810
Conversation
430eda3
to
5e2312a
Compare
CHANGELOG.md
Outdated
| @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ | |||
| ## Features | |||
|
|
|||
| - `$BAT_CONFIG_DIR` is now a recognized environment variable. It has precedence over `$XDG_CONFIG_HOME`, see #1727 (@billrisher) | |||
| - Support for `x:+x` syntax in line ranges (e.g. `20:+10`). See #1810 (@bojan88) | |||
src/line_range.rs
Outdated
| new_range.upper = if line_numbers[1].bytes().next().unwrap() == b'+' { | ||
| let more_lines = &line_numbers[1][1..] | ||
| .parse() | ||
| .map_err(|_| "Invalid line number after +")?; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After a bit more thinking I changed it to "Invalid character after +".
Please let me know if you still think we should change it, I don't mind.
I kept capital I because other messages start with capital letter.
And using character instead of number in the message because there might be something like +-10 (an assumption by a user) or +z1 (maybe a typo)
src/line_range.rs
Outdated
| @@ -47,7 +47,16 @@ impl LineRange { | |||
| } | |||
| 2 => { | |||
| new_range.lower = line_numbers[0].parse()?; | |||
| new_range.upper = line_numbers[1].parse()?; | |||
|
|
|||
| new_range.upper = if line_numbers[1].bytes().next().unwrap() == b'+' { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the .unwrap() call here is safe (but only due to the checks in lines 33:39), but still: it might be better to avoid it in case the surrounding logic here changes in the future. I think you could simply go with:
if line_numbers[1].bytes().next() == Some(b'+') {what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't like using .unwrap() too, but it looked impossible to fail.
Your suggestion is making it even safer, and much better. Thanks.
|
Thank you very much for your contribution! I like this new feature. |
Working with long files and using line range can be hard sometimes. For example if we want to see just a few lines after line
55478, we would need to write both numbers which are large, and that can lead to mistakes.It's much easier to write
55478:+5or55478:+30.This is influenced by similar syntax in
gitforlogsub-command with-Largument.