From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 06:24:19 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Allow callers of unpack_trees() to handle failure
Message-ID: <7v63zgqorw.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0712030032400.5349@iabervon.org>

Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org> writes:

> Return an error from unpack_trees() instead of calling die(), and exit
> with an error in read-tree. The merge function can return negative to
> abort.
>
> This will be used in builtin-checkout -m.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
> ---
>  builtin-read-tree.c |    3 +-
>  unpack-trees.c      |   85 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>  2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin-read-tree.c b/builtin-read-tree.c
> index 43cd56a..4f680c3 100644
> --- a/builtin-read-tree.c
> +++ b/builtin-read-tree.c
> @@ -269,7 +269,8 @@ int cmd_read_tree(int argc, const char **argv, const char *unused_prefix)
>  		parse_tree(tree);
>  		init_tree_desc(t+i, tree->buffer, tree->size);
>  	}
> -	unpack_trees(nr_trees, t, &opts);
> +	if (unpack_trees(nr_trees, t, &opts))
> +		return 128;

Magic 128 when everybody else in the patch returns -1 for error?

Otherwise the changes seem sensible, as long as the callers are paying
attention to the return values, which I admit that I did not check.