Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes:
>> @@ -96,8 +97,12 @@ int cmd_for_each_ref(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>> filter.name_patterns = argv;
>> }
>>
>> + if (include_root_refs) {
>> + flags |= FILTER_REFS_ROOT_REFS;
>> + }
>
> Nit: we don't use braces for single-line blocks.
>
Right, thanks, I always trip on this.
>> diff --git a/ref-filter.c b/ref-filter.c
>> index acb960e35c..0e83e29390 100644
>> --- a/ref-filter.c
>> +++ b/ref-filter.c
>> @@ -2628,6 +2628,12 @@ static int for_each_fullref_in_pattern(struct ref_filter *filter,
>> each_ref_fn cb,
>> void *cb_data)
>> {
>> + if (filter->kind == FILTER_REFS_KIND_MASK) {
>> + /* in this case, we want to print all refs including root refs. */
>
> Nit: s/in/In, as this is a full sentence.
>
Will change
>> @@ -2781,6 +2790,16 @@ static struct ref_array_item *apply_ref_filter(const char *refname, const struct
>>
>> /* Obtain the current ref kind from filter_ref_kind() and ignore unwanted refs. */
>> kind = filter_ref_kind(filter, refname);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * When printing HEAD with all other refs, we want to apply the same formatting
>> + * rules as the other refs, so we simply ask it to be treated as a pseudoref.
>> + */
>> + if (filter->kind == FILTER_REFS_KIND_MASK && kind == FILTER_REFS_DETACHED_HEAD)
>> + kind = FILTER_REFS_PSEUDOREFS;
>
> I'm not sure why exactly we need to munge the kind here. Would be great
> if the comment explained what the actual difference would be.
>
So the difference is
$ git for-each-ref --include-root-refs
9eda75497d43f2f9c70c1e14afb865108f9b4b49 commit FETCH_HEAD
ee99ac41aeb4129866710fc5771f11e1c1742dee commit HEAD
96c8a0712e569dd2812bf4fb5e72113caf326500 commit ORIG_HEAD
vs
$ git for-each-ref --include-root-refs | grep -v refs/
b4b94355057280749620c47999a4b45dc60f2681 commit (HEAD detached at b4b9435505)
9eda75497d43f2f9c70c1e14afb865108f9b4b49 commit FETCH_HEAD
ee99ac41aeb4129866710fc5771f11e1c1742dee commit ORIG_HEAD
This is because in `get_refname` we provide head description. But in
git-for-each-ref we don't want this, we want the format to be consistent.
>> + else if (!(kind & filter->kind))
>> + return NULL;
>> +
>> if (!(kind & filter->kind))
>> return NULL;
>
> This condition here is duplicated now, isn't it?
>
> Patrick
>
Seems like a bad merge on my end. Will fix. Thanks for the review. Will
send a new version soon.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
