On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 07:31:22AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> René Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx> writes:
>
> > ... and added a non-printable short flag for it, presumably by
> > accident.
>
> Very well spotted.
>
> FWIW, with the following patch on top of this patch, all tests pass
> (and without your fix, of course this notices the "\001" and breaks
> numerous tests that use "git reflog"). So you seem to have found
> the only one broken instance (among those that are tested, anyway).
This makes sense to me, but obviously won't catch non-tested cases. I
thought that a new Cocinelle rule might be appropriate here, but it is
frustratingly difficult to specify a constraint like:
OPT_BOOL(e1, e2, e3, ...)
with
!(e1 == 0 || (33 <= e1 && e1 <= 127))
I'll think on it a little bit, but this seems low priority enough that I
don't feel compelled to urgently deal with adding a new Coccinelle rule.
Thanks,
Taylor
