Re: [PATCH v3 05/16] ref-filter: move get_head_description() from branch.c

> Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> -static char *get_head_description(void)
>> -{
>> -     struct strbuf desc = STRBUF_INIT;
>> -     struct wt_status_state state;
>> -     memset(&state, 0, sizeof(state));
>> -     wt_status_get_state(&state, 1);
>> -     if (state.rebase_in_progress ||
>> -         state.rebase_interactive_in_progress)
>> -             strbuf_addf(&desc, _("(no branch, rebasing %s)"),
>> -                         state.branch);
>> -     else if (state.bisect_in_progress)
>> -             strbuf_addf(&desc, _("(no branch, bisect started on %s)"),
>> -                         state.branch);
>> -     else if (state.detached_from) {
>> -             /* TRANSLATORS: make sure these match _("HEAD detached at ")
>> -                and _("HEAD detached from ") in wt-status.c */
>> -             if (state.detached_at)
>> -                     strbuf_addf(&desc, _("(HEAD detached at %s)"),
>> -                             state.detached_from);
>> -             else
>> -                     strbuf_addf(&desc, _("(HEAD detached from %s)"),
>> -                             state.detached_from);
>> -     }
>> -     else
>> -             strbuf_addstr(&desc, _("(no branch)"));
>> -     free(state.branch);
>> -     free(state.onto);
>> -     free(state.detached_from);
>> -     return strbuf_detach(&desc, NULL);
>> -}
>> -
>
> Hmph, the name used to be a good one within the context of
> implementation of "git branch" command, but I have to wonder if it
> is a specific enough name in the global context of the entire
> project.  I also wondered if this sits better in wt-status.c;
> doesn't "git status" do something similar?
>