From: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 20:19:49 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] submodule: Make 'checkout' update_module explicit
Message-ID: <20140116201949.GX2647@odin.tremily.us>
In-Reply-To: <CALas-ig4=qKqpopaP163gVdBG39seWH61qqA5Jx0CR6AZkE6ZA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 09:07:22PM +0100, Francesco Pretto wrote:
> 2014/1/16 W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>:
> > Avoiding useless clones is probably more important than avoiding
> > duplicate "Invalid update mode" messages.
> 
> No, it's not duplicate code.

I meant “duplicating the "Invalid update mode" error message”.  I
missed the die-early distinction, but I understand now.  I think its
non-DRY to have an early case statement to validate the update_module,
and a later case statement to use it.  Still, keeping those separate
statements in sync shouldn't be too hard ;).

> Please keep both as Junio said.

That's what I said I'd do in the email you're quoting ;).  Are you ok
with the die-early validation checking all update_module settings
instead of just checking the loaded-from config branch?

Cheers,
Trevor

-- 
This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy