Re: [PATCH/RFC v4 3/5] sha1_name: support @{-N} syntax in get_sha1()
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jan 17, 2009, 19:37 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v63kd7mgv.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <1232208597-29249-4-git-send-email-trast@student.ethz.ch>
Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> writes:
Show 21 quoted lines
> Let get_sha1() parse the @{-N} syntax, with docs and tests.
>
> Note that while @{-1}^2, @{-2}~5 and such are supported, @{-1}@{1} is
> currently not allowed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>
> ...
> @@ -324,6 +326,16 @@ static int get_sha1_basic(const char *str, int len, unsigned char *sha1)
> return -1;
>
> if (!len && reflog_len) {
> + struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
> + int ret;
> + /* try the @{-N} syntax for n-th checkout */
> + ret = interpret_nth_last_branch(str+at, &buf);
> + if (ret > 0) {
> + /* substitute this branch name and restart */
> + return get_sha1_1(buf.buf, buf.len, sha1);
> + } else if (ret == 0) {
> + return -1;
> + }What are the possible failure cases, and what do we want to tell the end-user?
- You asked for 3rd but there weren't that many switches yet, and ask
"git rev-parse --verify @{-3}". Are we Ok with "fatal: Needed a single revision" from rev-parse? Do we
want to show "fatal: @{-3}: not that many branch switches yet"? What happens to "git checkout @{-3}" in this case? Having checkout say
"fatal: invalid reference: @{-3}" would be fine in this case, I think. - You try "git checkout @{-3}", you were on "frotz" branch back then, but
the branch does not exist anymore.I think you will get "fatal: invalid reference: frotz" from checkout, which should be fine.
There also is a case where nth_last_branch() may find something that is not a branch (e.g. "git checkout HEAD^"), but I am hoping we can label that as a bug in nth_last_branch() and fix it later.