Re: [PATCH] Add new @ shortcut for HEAD
- From
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
- Date
- Apr 30, 2013, 23:00 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAMP44s3L6X=iWK7S-JFqp42PmNx4xbh-GnPJpAgur4FGoZYNbg@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAMP44s02QkL7QAuHHm_uT6B4QCzk9Mur0_w_D8t2A2u1go2F8A@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Since 'update-ref master' updates the 'master' ref, and not
>>> 'refs/heads/master' (IOW; no parsing at all), I think it makes sense
>>> that @{-1} is not parsed, and neither is @.
>>
>> That is a very valid point.
>>
>> What should "rev-parse --symbolic-full-name @" say?
>
> Probably the same as 'rev-parse --symbolic-full-name HEAD' (it doesn't
> with my patch).The gist of my patch can be dropped, this does the trick:
--- a/sha1_name.c +++ b/sha1_name.c @@ -965,6 +965,21 @@ int get_sha1_mb(const char *name, unsigned char *sha1) return st; } +static int interpret_empty_at(const char *name, int namelen, int len, struct strbuf *buf) +{ + if (namelen - len < 1 || name[len + 1] == '{') + return -1; + + strbuf_reset(buf); + if (len == 0) { + strbuf_add(buf, "HEAD", 4); + return 1; + } else { + strbuf_add(buf, name, len); + return len + 1; + } +} + static int reinterpret(const char *name, int namelen, int len, struct strbuf *buf) { /* we have extra data, which might need further processing */ @@ -1025,9 +1040,15 @@ int interpret_branch_name(const char *name, struct strbuf *buf) cp = strchr(name, '@'); if (!cp) return -1; + + len = interpret_empty_at(name, namelen, cp - name, buf); + if (len > 0) + return reinterpret(name, namelen, len, buf); + tmp_len = upstream_mark(cp, namelen - (cp - name)); if (!tmp_len) return -1; + len = cp + tmp_len - name; cp = xstrndup(name, cp - name); upstream = branch_get(*cp ? cp : NULL);
-- Felipe Contreras