Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: >> I'm sightly concerned that this opens the possibility for unexpected effects >> if two different labels get sanitized to the same string. I suspect it's >> unlikely to happen in practice but doing something like percent encoding >> non-alphanumeric characters would avoid the problem entirely. > > Oh, but we make sure that the labels are unique, via the `label_oid()` > function! Otherwise, we would not be able to label more than one merge > parent ;-) It somewhat feels suboptimal, from code followability's point of view, to have this "pre-sanitization" to replace isspace() to a dash, which is being extended to "all non-alnums", and the uniquefy of labels in label_oid(), in two separate places. I wonder if the resulting code becomes easier to follow and harder to introduce new bugs, if this part is made to just yield label.buf it obtained form the log message as-is and leave the munging to label_oid()?
