Hi
On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 5:28 PM Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 7:36 AM <marcandre.lureau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Defaulting to editing the description of the rebased branch without an
> > explicit branchname argument would be useful. Even the git bash prompt
> > shows the name of the rebased branch, and then
> >
> > ~/src/git (mybranch|REBASE-i 1/2)$ git branch --edit-description
> > fatal: Cannot give description to detached HEAD
> >
> > looks quite unhelpful.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > diff --git a/builtin/branch.c b/builtin/branch.c
> > @@ -745,15 +745,27 @@ int cmd_branch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> > if (!argc) {
> > - if (filter.detached)
> > - die(_("Cannot give description to detached HEAD"));
> > - branch_name = head;
> > + if (filter.detached) {
> > + struct wt_status_state state;
> > +
> > + memset(&state, 0, sizeof(state));
> > +
> > + if (wt_status_check_rebase(NULL, &state)) {
> > + branch_name = state.branch;
> > + }
>
> Style: drop unneeded braces.
ok
>
> > +
> > + if (!branch_name)
> > + die(_("Cannot give description to detached HEAD"));
> > +
> > + free(state.onto);
>
> Also, no need for all the blank lines which eat up valuable vertical
> screen real-estate without making the code clearer.
ok
>
> > + } else
> > + branch_name = xstrdup(head);
>
> It would be easier to see what happens in the common case (when not
> rebasing) if you invert the condition to `if (!filter.detached)` and
> turn this one-line 'else' branch into the 'if' branch.
indeed
>
> > @@ -772,6 +784,8 @@ int cmd_branch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> > if (edit_branch_description(branch_name))
> > return 1;
> > +
> > + free(branch_name);
>
> That `return 1` just above this free() is leaking 'branch_name', isn't it?
right, let's fix that too
>
> > diff --git a/t/t3200-branch.sh b/t/t3200-branch.sh
> > @@ -1260,6 +1260,25 @@ test_expect_success 'use --edit-description' '
> > +test_expect_success 'use --edit-description during rebase' '
> > + write_script editor <<-\EOF &&
> > + echo "Rebase contents" >"$1"
> > + EOF
> > + (
> > + set_fake_editor &&
> > + FAKE_LINES="break 1" git rebase -i HEAD^ &&
> > + EDITOR=./editor git branch --edit-description &&
> > + git rebase --continue
> > + ) &&
> > + write_script editor <<-\EOF &&
> > + git stripspace -s <"$1" >"EDITOR_OUTPUT"
> > + EOF
> > + EDITOR=./editor git branch --edit-description &&
> > + echo "Rebase contents" >expect &&
> > + test_cmp expect EDITOR_OUTPUT
> > +'
> > +test_done
>
> Strange place for a test_done() invocation considering that existing
> tests follow the new one added by this patch.
doh, sorry
thanks for the review!
>
> > test_expect_success 'detect typo in branch name when using --edit-description' '
> > write_script editor <<-\EOF &&
> > echo "New contents" >"$1"
--
Marc-André Lureau
