Re: [PATCH] branch: don't assume the merge filter ref exists

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 27, 2012, 19:43 UTC
Message-ID: <20120227194305.GE1600@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <7vk4386pgi.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:33:49AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > You would also get NULL if the object exists but is not a commit. Maybe:
> >
> >   die("object '%s' does not point to a commit", ...)
> >
> > would be better? It covers the wrong-type case, and is still technically
> > true when the object does not exist.
> 
> For this particular message I like the above a lot better.  The output
> from "git grep -e 'invalid object' -e 'bad object'" seems to show that
> the use of both are fairly evenly distributed.

It looks like "bad object" generally comes from parse_object failing, which makes sense. It either means object corruption or you fed a full 40-char sha1 that didn't exist (which, if you are being that specific, probably is an indication of broken-ness in your repository).

It looks like "invalid object" comes from failing to access the subject of an annotated tag or an entry in a tree, both of which would meet the same criteria (corruption or a missing 40-char sha1).

I don't think bad versus invalid in existing cases is a big deal, as they are both used consistently. But in this case, I think either would be wrong, since it is equally likely that the user gave an existing, OK object of the wrong type.

-Peff