2018-03-21 23:36 GMT+03:00 Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Olga Telezhnaya <olyatelezhnaya@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> @@ -2144,13 +2151,15 @@ int format_ref_array_item(struct ref_array_item *info,
>>
>> for (cp = format->format; *cp && (sp = find_next(cp)); cp = ep + 1) {
>> struct atom_value *atomv;
>> + int pos;
>>
>> ep = strchr(sp, ')');
>> if (cp < sp)
>> append_literal(cp, sp, &state);
>> - get_ref_atom_value(info,
>> - parse_ref_filter_atom(format, sp + 2, ep),
>> - &atomv);
>> + pos = parse_ref_filter_atom(format, sp + 2, ep, error_buf);
>> + if (pos < 0)
>> + return -1;
>> + get_ref_atom_value(info, pos, &atomv);
>> if (atomv->handler(atomv, &state, error_buf))
>> return -1;
>> }
>
> These error returns leave the formatting state "state" on the stack
> holding onto its resources, no?
Yes, you are right, thanks a lot!
>
> The only thing the caller of format_ref_array_item() that notices an
> error return does is to die even after this series, so in that sense
> it does not matter (yet), but it still feels somewhat wrong.
>
I am sure I need to fix it anyway, thanks.
