On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 4:44 AM Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 05:31:22PM +0900, nbelakovski@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > From: Nickolai Belakovski <nbelakovski@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > The output of git branch is modified to mark branches checkout out in a > > s/checkout out/checked out/ ? > Yes, thanks > > > - strbuf_addf(&local, "%%(if)%%(HEAD)%%(then)* %s%%(else) %s%%(end)", > > - branch_get_color(BRANCH_COLOR_CURRENT), > > - branch_get_color(BRANCH_COLOR_LOCAL)); > > + strbuf_addf(&local, "%%(if)%%(HEAD)%%(then)* %s%%(else)%%(if)%%(worktreepath)%%(then)+ %s%%(else) %s%%(end)%%(end)", > > + branch_get_color(BRANCH_COLOR_CURRENT), > > + branch_get_color(BRANCH_COLOR_WORKTREE), > > + branch_get_color(BRANCH_COLOR_LOCAL)); > > Makes sense. The long line is ugly. Our format does not support breaking > long lines, though we could break the C string, I think, like: > > strbuf_add(&local, > "%%(if)%%(HEAD)" > "%%(then)* %s" > "%%(else)%(if)%%(worktreepath)" > "%%(then)+ %s" > "%%(else)" > "%%(then) %s" > "%%(end)%%(end)"); > > That's pretty ugly, too, but it at least shows the conditional > structure. True, but other lines within that file are about as long. I'd feel that I should make all of them reflect the conditional structure if I'm going to make one of them reflect it. Granted none of the others have nested if's, but personally I think it's OK as is. The nested if is short enough. > > > > > +test_expect_success '"add" a worktree' ' > > + mkdir worktree_dir && > > + git worktree add -b master_worktree worktree_dir master > > +' > > This mkdir gets deleted in the next patch. It should just not be added > here. Whoops, removed > > > +cat >expect <<'EOF' > > +* <GREEN>(HEAD detached from fromtag)<RESET> > > + ambiguous<RESET> > > + branch-one<RESET> > > + branch-two<RESET> > > + master<RESET> > > ++ <CYAN>master_worktree<RESET> > > + ref-to-branch<RESET> -> branch-one > > + ref-to-remote<RESET> -> origin/branch-one > > +EOF > > +test_expect_success TTY 'worktree colors correct' ' > > + test_terminal git branch >actual.raw && > > + test_decode_color <actual.raw >actual && > > + test_cmp expect actual > > +' > > We are not testing the auto-color behavior here, so I think you could > just use "git branch --color >actual.raw" and drop the TTY prerequisite. > That's shorter and simpler, and will let your test run on more > platforms. > Done locally, will be part of v9 > -Peff
