From: Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 07:43:03 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] t9350: point out that refs are not updated correctly
Message-ID: <CAGdFq_j5sWsHwJY-rWP-XJ6cMF6uwSq=9beFe9ZuZyixBa1fVA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20121025073454.GB15790@elie.Belkin>

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> If I remember right, '^foo1' is (whence == REV_CMD_REV) with (flags ==
> UNINTERESTING).  That's why sequencer.c checks for unadorned revs like
> this:
>
>         if (opts->revs->cmdline.nr == 1 &&
>             opts->revs->cmdline.rev->whence == REV_CMD_REV &&
>             opts->revs->no_walk &&
>             !opts->revs->cmdline.rev->flags) {
>
> Maybe
>
>         if (elem->flags & UNINTERESTING)
>                 continue;
>         if (elem->whence == REV_CMD_PARENTS_ONLY)       /* foo^@ */
>                 continue;
>
> would work well here?  That would handle bizarre cases like "--not
> next..master" (and ordinary cases like "master...next") better, by
> focusing on the semantics instead of syntax.

I know there was a reason why using UNINTERESTING didn't work
(otherwise we could've used that to start with, instead of needing
Junio's whence solution). I think all refs ended up being marked as
UNINTERESTING or somesuch.

-- 
Cheers,

Sverre Rabbelier