Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> Not sure if it's the right way to fix these though. For example, while
> 1/1 looks very good from i18n perspective, code-wise it's quite ugly.
> Grouping format strings in array also prevents gcc from checking
> correct parameters, I think.
[...]
> --- a/branch.c
> +++ b/branch.c
> @@ -74,25 +74,43 @@ void install_branch_config(int flag, const char *local, const char *origin, cons
[...]
> - strbuf_addstr(&key, origin ? "remote" : "local");
> -
> - /* Are we tracking a proper "branch"? */
> - if (remote_is_branch) {
> - strbuf_addf(&key, " branch %s", shortname);
> - if (origin)
> - strbuf_addf(&key, " from %s", origin);
> + if (rebasing) {
> + if (remote_is_branch) {
> + if (origin)
> + printf("Branch %s set up to track remote branch %s from %s by rebasing.\n",
> + local, shortname, origin);
> + else
[...]
> + } else {
> + if (origin)
[...]
> + }
> + } else {
> + if (remote_is_branch) {
[...]
I think a table-driven version of this switchboard would be much
easier to read, even if it would hurt gcc's -Wformat checking. If the
-Wformat safety is too precious to lose, would something like the
following work?
switch (tracking_msg_flags) {
case REBASING | REMOTE_IS_BRANCH | ORIGIN:
printf(_("Branch %s set up to track remote branch %s ..."),
...
break;
case REBASING | REMOTE_IS_BRANCH:
printf(_(...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html