Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> diff --git a/commit-graph.c b/commit-graph.c
> index c68f5c6b3a..acca753ce8 100644
> --- a/commit-graph.c
> +++ b/commit-graph.c
> @@ -2686,9 +2686,12 @@ static int verify_one_commit_graph(struct repository *r,
> graph_report(_("commit-graph has generation number zero for commit %s, but non-zero elsewhere"),
> oid_to_hex(&cur_oid));
> generation_zero = GENERATION_ZERO_EXISTS;
> - } else if (generation_zero == GENERATION_ZERO_EXISTS)
> - graph_report(_("commit-graph has non-zero generation number for commit %s, but zero elsewhere"),
> - oid_to_hex(&cur_oid));
> + } else {
> + if (generation_zero == GENERATION_ZERO_EXISTS)
> + graph_report(_("commit-graph has non-zero generation number for commit %s, but zero elsewhere"),
> + oid_to_hex(&cur_oid));
> + generation_zero = GENERATION_NUMBER_EXISTS;
> + }
Hmph, doesn't this potentially cause us to emit the two reports
alternating, if we are unlucky enough to see a commit with 0
generation first (which will silently set gz to ZERO_EXISTS), then
another commit with non-zero generation (which will complain we saw
non-zero for the current one and earlier we saw zero elsewhere, and
then set gz to NUM_EXISTS), and then another commit with 0
generation (which will complain the other way, and set gz back again
to ZERO_EXISTS)?
I am tempted to say this gz business should be done with two bits
(seen zero bit and seen non-zero bit), and immediately after we see
both kinds, we should report once and stop making further reports,
but ...
> if (generation_zero == GENERATION_ZERO_EXISTS)
> continue;
... as I do not see what this "continue" is doing, I'd stop at
expressing my puzzlement ;-)
Thanks.
