From: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@gnu.org>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 14:40:57 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] make commit --interactive lock index
Message-ID: <483EC079.1050008@gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0805291454270.13507@racer.site.net>


>>>> +	assert (!(interactive && pathspec && *pathspec));
>>> As pathspec is specified indirectly by the user, I think an assert() 
>>> here is actively wrong.
>> But the program may still guarantee a condition by checking it 
>> elsewhere.  I don't need to teach you about that, do I?  In particular, 
>> the assert checks that this:
>>
>> if (interactive && argc > 0)
>>         die("Paths with --interactive does not make sense.");
>>
>> ... is equivalent to !pathspec || !*pathspec.
> 
> Okay, I have to spell it out:
> 
> I think that the assert() here is not helpful at all, and that you should 
> rather do the "if () die()" thingie.

The "if() die ()" thingie is already in builtin-commit.c, so we won't 
ever get a pathspec in the "add --interactive" case.  If we do, 
something else has already been done incorrectly before -- not by the 
user but by the programmer.

Paolo