Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> My version reads as
>>
>> try something;
>> if (it failed && I'm only here to report an error)
>> report_error();
>>
>> which I find easier to understand.
>
> I agree that _this_ part is easy to understand when written that
> way. But then shouldn't there be a blanket "The caller is here only
> to report an error, but all the previous code didn't find any error,
> so there is something wrong" check much later in the code before it
> returns a success? Or am I being too paranoid?
Currently, there's no problem if get_sha1_with_context_1 returns without
dying, because the caller does:
if (!(arg[0] == ':' && !isalnum(arg[1])))
/* try a detailed diagnostic ... */
get_sha1_with_mode_1(arg, sha1, &mode, 1, prefix);
/* ... or fall back the most general message. */
die("ambiguous argument '%s': unknown revision or path not in the working tree.\n"
"Use '--' to separate paths from revisions", arg);
If we failed to give a nice diagnosis, we give the generic error
message.
We could add this check within get_sha1_with_context_1 to simplify the
task of the caller, but that would require adding it before each
"return" statement, which I think is overkill.
--
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/
--
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