On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 5:12 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> "Chris Torek via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > - } else if (cache_name_pos(src, length) < 0)
> > - bad = _("not under version control");
> > - else if (lstat(dst, &st) == 0 &&
> > + } else if (cache_name_pos(src, length) < 0) {
> > + /*
> > + * This occurs for both untracked files *and*
> > + * files that are in merge-conflict state, so
> > + * let's distinguish between those two.
> > + */
> > + struct cache_entry *ce = cache_file_exists(src, length, ignore_case);
> > + if (ce == NULL)
> > + bad = _("not under version control");
> > + else
> > + bad = _("must resolve merge conflict first");
>
>
> The original did not care about the cache entry itself, and that is
> why cache_name_pos() was used. Now you care what cache entry is at
> that position, running both calls is quite wasteful.
>
> Would it work better to declare "struct cache_entry *ce" in the
> scope that surrounds this if/elseif cascade and then rewrite this
> part more like so:
>
> } else if (!(ce = cache_file_exists(...)) {
> bad = _("not tracked");
> } else if (ce_stage(ce)) {
> bad = _("conflicted");
> } else if (lstat(...)) { ...
Or, even better, make ce_stage(ce) not be an error; see
https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqk1ozb6qy.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/.
I hadn't gotten around to it yet, but it's still on my radar.
(That said, I've obviously taken a really long time to get to it, so
improving the error message as an interim step is perfectly fine.)
