Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] add-patch: classify '@' as a synonym for 'HEAD'

From: Ghanshyam Thakkar <shyamthakkar001@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 9, 2024, 15:57 UTC
Message-ID: <CZ0O76ZJ2BPR.1PSK0WMUHWT8H@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqil31dqx6.fsf@gitster.g>

On Wed Feb 7, 2024 at 6:35 AM IST, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> Ghanshyam Thakkar <shyamthakkar001@gmail.com> writes:
> > There is also logic in builtin/checkout.c to
> > convert all command line input rev to the raw object name for underlying
> > machinery (e.g., diff-index) that does not recognize the <a>...<b>
> > notation, but we'd need to leave 'HEAD' intact. Now we need to teach
> > that '@' is a synonym to 'HEAD' to that code and leave '@' intact, too.
>
> Makes me wonder why we cannot use the same "normalize @ to HEAD
> upfront" approach here, though?
>
> It would involve translating "@" given to new_branch_info->name to
> "HEAD" early, possibly in setup_new_branch_info_and_source_tree(),
> and that probably will fix the other strcmp() with "HEAD" that
> appears in builtin/checkout.c:update_refs_for_switch() as well, no?

I was wondering about "git checkout -b @". If we were to make the change in setup_new_branch_info_and_source_tree(), then '@' would not be treated as 'HEAD' in the above mentioned case and there would also be some disparity on error messages showing '@' when running the above command, and after hitting setup_new_branch_info_and_source_tree() would show 'HEAD'. However, making the change in builtin/checkout.c:checkout_main() would disallow creating a '@' branch alltogether. Hence, I would like some feedback on whether we should change the behavior of 'git checkout -b @' or not.