Hi Junio,
On Wed, 1 Dec 2021, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx>
> writes:
>
> [...]
> > diff --git a/builtin/add.c b/builtin/add.c
> > index ef6b619c45e..8ef230a345b 100644
> > --- a/builtin/add.c
> > +++ b/builtin/add.c
> > @@ -237,17 +237,12 @@ int run_add_interactive(const char *revision, const char *patch_mode,
> > int use_builtin_add_i =
> > git_env_bool("GIT_TEST_ADD_I_USE_BUILTIN", -1);
> >
> > - if (use_builtin_add_i < 0) {
> > - int experimental;
> > - if (!git_config_get_bool("add.interactive.usebuiltin",
> > - &use_builtin_add_i))
> > - ; /* ok */
> > - else if (!git_config_get_bool("feature.experimental", &experimental) &&
> > - experimental)
> > - use_builtin_add_i = 1;
> > - }
> > + if (use_builtin_add_i < 0 &&
> > + git_config_get_bool("add.interactive.usebuiltin",
> > + &use_builtin_add_i))
> > + use_builtin_add_i = 1;
> >
> > - if (use_builtin_add_i == 1) {
> > + if (use_builtin_add_i != 0) {
>
> Nit.
>
> if (use_builtin_add_i) {
>
> I wondered if these random calls to git_config_get_X() should be
> consolidated into the existing add_config() callback, but this
> conditional will go away hopefully in a few releases, so it probably
> is not worth it. Inheriting the way the original code grabbed the
> configuration variables is good enough for our purpose here.
As I said in my reply to Phillip, I found it misleading to skip the `!= 0`
because we are catching both the `== 1` as well as the `== -1` here.
Ciao,
Dscho
