From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:06:53 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow git-diff exit with codes similar to diff(1)
Message-ID: <7vodmvah5e.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <81b0412b0703140933v5c684aa9g1f61d61e502c6783@mail.gmail.com>

"Alex Riesen" <raa.lkml@gmail.com> writes:

> On 3/14/07, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
>> > -     return run_diff_files_cmd(&rev, argc, argv);
>> > +     result = run_diff_files_cmd(&rev, argc, argv);
>> > +     return rev.diffopt.diff_exit_code ? rev.diffopt.exit_code: result;
>> >  }
>>
>> Yuck.  Let's call the former "exit_with_status" (meaning, the
>> caller instructed us to do that) and the latter "has_changes".
>
> I like "exit_with_status". But has_changes looks confusing
> good near return value of run_diff_files_cmd, which "has"
> nothing. Or do you mean to highlight this "difference"?

Maybe 'found_changes' would be a better name, then?

	if (exit_with_status)
        	return !!found_changes;
	else
        	return result;