On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 4:55 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I've been chasing down some edge cases in refs.c as part of another WIP > series I have and found that for this particular "errno" stuff we don't > have any test coverage. And with master & hanwen/reftable if I apply: > > - errno = EINVAL; .. > All tests pass on both. .. > That I can remove error checking/handling from this place means existing > general logic was faithfully copied without checking that we have a test > for it, or adding one. I think that is an unfair characterization. The API documentation of read_raw_ref_fn says that implementations should return EINVAL for certain cases, so that's what I did. The point of having a documented internal API is that one doesn't have to double check what is behind the API. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - Google Munich I work 80%. Don't expect answers from me on Fridays. -- Google Germany GmbH, Erika-Mann-Strasse 33, 80636 Munich Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg Geschäftsführer: Paul Manicle, Halimah DeLaine Prado
