From: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 16:12:45 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] for-each-ref: add ahead-behind format atom
Message-ID: <3f7fe6c4-197e-bde9-50b8-ecce705a9f22@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqh6umovf9.fsf@gitster.g>

On 3/15/2023 12:01 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On Fri, Mar 10 2023, Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote:
>>
>>> From: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
>>> [...]
>>> +ahead-behind:<ref>::
>>> +	Two integers, separated by a space, demonstrating the number of
>>> +	commits ahead and behind, respectively, when comparing the output
>>> +	ref to the `<ref>` specified in the format.
>>> +
>>
>> As a potential (expert) user who hasn't read the code yet I'd think the
>> the "<ref>" here would be the same as "update-ref", but glancing ahead
>> at your tests it seems that it does ref matching, so "refs/heads/master"
>> and "master" are both accepted?
>>
>> Since nothing else uses "<ref>" here I think we should clearly define
>> the matching rules somehow, or maybe we do, and I missed it.
> 
> I vaguely recall noticing this in the previous round, but doesn't
> this only require a commit-ish, not even a ref?  It is parsed with
> lookup_commit_reference_by_name().

You noticed it in this round, but I haven't sent v3 yet. I have
this in my local copy:

ahead-behind:<committish>::
	Two integers, separated by a space, demonstrating the number of
	commits ahead and behind, respectively, when comparing the output
	ref to the `<committish>` specified in the format.

Thanks,
-Stolee