On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 12:39 PM René Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx> wrote: > Am 26.11.23 um 18:49 schrieb Eric Sunshine: > > A couple additional instances recently slipped into `show-ref.c` which > > were caught during review[1,2] but nevertheless made it to > > "master"[3,4]. This patch, of course, doesn't need to address those, > > but if rerolling for some other reason, perhaps they can be included, > > as well(?). > > > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAPig+cSrp7vZuy7D_ENHKZKZzF4OSmCtfYNHPGMtS1Hj6gArDw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAPig+cRTOMie0rUf=Mhbo9e2EXf-_2kQyMeqpB9OCRB1MZZ1rw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > [3]: 199970e72f (builtin/show-ref: ensure mutual exclusiveness of > > subcommands, 2023-10-31) > > [4]: 9080a7f178 (builtin/show-ref: add new mode to check for reference > > existence, 2023-10-31) > > [4] changes the message added by [3], so that's one instance, right? Yes, correct. Sorry for misleadingly saying there were two new messages; it's been a month since I looked at the patches closely, and forgot that it was just the single message which had been modified by the subsequent patch. Thanks for taking care of this so quickly! > --- >8 --- > Subject: [PATCH] show-ref: use die_for_incompatible_opt3() > > Use the standard message for reporting the use of multiple mutually > exclusive options by calling die_for_incompatible_opt3() instead of > rolling our own. This has the benefits of showing only the actually > given options, reducing the number of strings to translate and making > the UI slightly more consistent. > > Adjust the test to no longer insist on a specific order of the > reported options, as this implementation detail does not affect the > usefulness of the error message. > > Signed-off-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx> Apparently, I haven't been following along closely enough, thus wasn't aware that we had the die_for_incompatible_opt*() family of functions. Neat.
