Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] worktree: refactor infer_backlink() to use *strbuf

> On Sunday, October 6th, 2024 at 13:16, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:
> > ... this code now becomes more than a little confusing to read. It
> > says "if infer_backlink then signal error", which sounds rather
> > backward and leaves the reader scratching his or her head. ("Why
> > signal error if the function succeeded?"). Hence, infer_backlink()
> > should probably return 1 on success and 0 on failure, which will make
> > this code read more idiomatically:
> >
> > if (!infer_backlink(realdotgit.buf, &backlink)) {
> > ...signal error...
>
> This was my first thought, however, on unix it is fairly standard
> to return 0 if successful and a non-zero int if there's an error.
> I don't mind updating, but I want to follow what makes the most
> sense and would be most expected.