2009/3/12 Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx>:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 04:40:10PM +0000, Pieter de Bie wrote:
>
>>> I think the future-proofing is probably not worth the effort.
>>> Catching things that are ambiguous _now_ will cover the "oops, I
>>> typed the wrong thing" case, which I think is really the issue.
>>
>> Exactly, that's the common case where things go wrong. I guess using
>> dwim_ref should be DWIM enough? :)
>
> Hmm. Yeah, I mispoke before: I should have said dwim_ref instead of
> resolve_ref (which doesn't dwym :) ).
>
> Here's a sloppy patch that I think does what you want; but it might make
> more sense to just iterate over ref_rev_parse_rules ourselves, as
> dwim_ref does more than we care about (and we should probably
> differentiate between "a branch already exists" and "this would make an
> ambiguous ref").
>
> ---
> diff --git a/branch.c b/branch.c
> index d20fb04..409f445 100644
> --- a/branch.c
> +++ b/branch.c
> @@ -122,6 +122,7 @@ void create_branch(const char *head,
> unsigned char sha1[20];
> char *real_ref, msg[PATH_MAX + 20];
> struct strbuf ref = STRBUF_INIT;
> + char *junk;
> int forcing = 0;
> int len;
>
> @@ -135,7 +136,8 @@ void create_branch(const char *head,
> if (check_ref_format(ref.buf))
> die("'%s' is not a valid branch name.", name);
>
> - if (resolve_ref(ref.buf, sha1, 1, NULL)) {
> + if (dwim_ref(name, strlen(name), sha1, &junk)) {
> + free(junk);
Presumably 'junk' is the resolved name? I wonder if it's worth
putting this info in the error message?
> if (!force)
> die("A branch named '%s' already exists.", name);
> die("A branch named '%s' already exists (%s).", name, junk);
That would give "A branched named 'origin/master' already exists
(refs/remotes/origin/master)" right?
Dunno if it's worth it, just wondering.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
