Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> "Tao Klerks via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> if (!remote_find_tracking(remote, &tracking->spec)) {
>> - if (++tracking->matches == 1) {
>> + switch (++tracking->matches) {
>> + case 1:
>> string_list_append(tracking->srcs, tracking->spec.src);
>> tracking->remote = remote->name;
>> - } else {
>> + break;
>> + case 2:
>> + /* there are at least two remotes; backfill the first one */
>> + string_list_append(&ftb->ambiguous_remotes, tracking->spec.src);
>> + /* fall through */
>> + default:
>> + string_list_append(&ftb->ambiguous_remotes, remote->name);
>> free(tracking->spec.src);
>> string_list_clear(tracking->srcs, 0);
>> + break;
>
> Just to sanity check this part,
>
> - During the first iteration, we append tracking->spec.src to
> tracking->srcs, and set tracking->remote to remote->name;
>
> - In later iterations, we do not want to touch tracking->srcs, and
> want to collect remote->name.
>
> And "backfill" assumes that tracking->spec.src at that point in the
> second iteration is the same as what we got in remote->name in the
> first round. If that were a correct assumption, then it is curious
> that the first iteration uses tracking->spec.src and remote->name
> separately for different purposes, which makes me want to double
> check if the assumption is indeed correct.
>
> If it were tracking->remote (which was assigned the value of
> remote->name during the first iteration) that is used to backfill
> before we append remote->name in the second iteration, I wouldn't
> find it "curious", but the use of tracking->spec.src there makes me
> feel confused.
>
> Thanks.
Thanks for bringing this up, I also found this unusual when I was
reading v5.
