Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 07/08/2013 12:33 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> The logic will be used in a new codepath for showing exact matches.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> builtin/name-rev.c | 19 ++++++++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/builtin/name-rev.c b/builtin/name-rev.c
>> index 87d4854..1234ebb 100644
>> --- a/builtin/name-rev.c
>> +++ b/builtin/name-rev.c
>> @@ -96,6 +96,17 @@ static int subpath_matches(const char *path, const char *filter)
>> return -1;
>> }
>>
>> +static const char *name_ref_abbrev(const char *refname, int shorten_unambiguous)
>> +{
>> + if (shorten_unambiguous)
>> + refname = shorten_unambiguous_ref(refname, 0);
>> + else if (!prefixcmp(refname, "refs/heads/"))
>> + refname = refname + 11;
>> + else if (!prefixcmp(refname, "refs/"))
>> + refname = refname + 5;
>> + return refname;
>> +}
>> +
>
> In my opinion this would be a tad clearer if each of the branches of the
> "if" returned the value directly rather than setting refname and relying
> on the "return" statement that follows. But it's probably a matter of
> taste.
I tend to agree; this is a straight-forward code movement (with the
variable name changed to conform to your recent refs.c update to
call these things "refname"), and that was the primary reason I kept
them like so.
>
>> struct name_ref_data {
>> int tags_only;
>> int name_only;
>> @@ -134,13 +145,7 @@ static int name_ref(const char *path, const unsigned char *sha1, int flags, void
>> if (o && o->type == OBJ_COMMIT) {
>> struct commit *commit = (struct commit *)o;
>>
>> - if (can_abbreviate_output)
>> - path = shorten_unambiguous_ref(path, 0);
>> - else if (!prefixcmp(path, "refs/heads/"))
>> - path = path + 11;
>> - else if (!prefixcmp(path, "refs/"))
>> - path = path + 5;
>> -
>> + path = name_ref_abbrev(path, can_abbreviate_output);
>> name_rev(commit, xstrdup(path), 0, 0, deref);
>> }
>> return 0;
>>
>
> Michael
--
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