> > + if (strstr(entry, "**")) {
> > + warning(_("Pathspec provided contains `**`, but no :(glob) magic.\n\tIt will not match 0 or more directories!"));
> > + }
> Why an extra \t? Unnecessary indentation?
It brings out the warning label:
root@30f6bde171fe:/usr/src/git/t# ../git stash -- **/bar
warning: Pathspec provided contains `**`, but no :(glob) magic.
It will not match 0 or more directories!
error: pathspec ':(,prefix:2)t/**/bar' did not match any file(s) known to git
Did you forget to 'git add'?
and "makes the user feel" that these two lines are in reality one
(but this is way over any sensible line limit to present as such).
I would've padded exactly, but:
* `\t` expansion is terminal-specific (usually set at 8, but not guaranteed)
* ` `-only would've been too long of a padding to an already long line
Ofc, if someone really wanted to solve this, someone
could rework the `void vreportf` split and auto-pad
prefix at newline, but sounds like a project on its own ...
> > +test_expect_success '** with :(literal) does not warn of lacking glob magic' '
> Padding with without test above?
Yes; it somewhat aligns individual test output:
root@30f6bde171fe:/usr/src/git/t# ./t6130-pathspec-noglob.sh
...
ok 22 - ** without :(glob) warns of lacking glob magic
ok 23 - ** with :(literal) does not warn of lacking glob magic
# passed all 23 test(s)
to emphasize they are a positive/negative test pair.
I don't know how well I feel about this anyway; I can undo it.
