René Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx> writes: >>> * NEEDSWORK: These loops that attempt to find presence of >>> - * options without understanding that the options they are >>> + * options without understanding the options they are >>> * skipping are broken (e.g., it would not know "--grep >>> * --exclude-promisor-objects" is not triggering >>> * "--exclude-promisor-objects" option). We really need >> >> This tacked-on bit seems funny to me. Isn't the original more correct? >> The loops do not understand that the options are broken. > > No, the options are fine, but the loops are broken -- they cannot tell > what they are looking at is an option or an argument of a preceding > option, yet they ignore that latter possibility. So the word "that" > is best left out. Or "... understanding the options, which they are skipping, are broken", perhaps. > I also don't see a connection to the struct move, > though. True, this has nothing to do with the main theme of the patch.
