Re: [Outreachy] Introduction

From: Sangeeta NB <sangunb09@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 15, 2020, 10:18 UTC
Message-ID: <CAHjREB7xhBWHUCJ+T78i6dDGQr055sMAaYzG4gaQSr0T88cseg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <3c0bf417-b3d5-b615-c605-49a5d8be4e06@gmail.com>

Hey,

> I've got a fixup which I'll post after this which gets rid of the global
> flag and instead uses a flag in struct diff_options.

Thanks for the patch, I was thinking about something on similar lines but couldn't come up with anything.

Also, one thing I observed that when I add a printf statement in wt-status.c, something like this:

--- a/wt-status.c
+++ b/wt-status.c
@@ -601,11 +601,11 @@ static void
wt_status_collect_changes_worktree(struct wt_status *s)
        rev.diffopt.output_format |= DIFF_FORMAT_CALLBACK;
        rev.diffopt.flags.dirty_submodules = 1;
        rev.diffopt.ita_invisible_in_index = 1;
+       printf("a printf statement\n");
        if (!s->show_untracked_files)

then git status shows output:

sh-3.2$ git status -s -uno --ignore-submodules=none
a printf statement
 m submod

which is what is expected. But when I comment out the printf statement
it again gives no output. I couldn't understand why this is taking
place and how can a printf line modify the behavior of git status.

> I thinking it would be worth considering if
> some of them should instead be changed to pass --ignore-submodules=none
> rather than changing the expected result.

Ya, that's a good suggestion. Would look at those tests again and see
if I can pass the --ignore-submodules=none option.

Thanks