Re: [PATCH v2] remote.c: convert if-else tower to switch

From: Ben Knoble <ben.knoble@gmail.com>
Date: Aug 7, 2025, 12:35 UTC
Message-ID: <F3252723-7E5E-4E84-94E4-5FC00298BAB2@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <54a16614e2a38117f533ede3321b4d8ee2eabe8c.1754558302.git.liu.denton@gmail.com>

Show 67 quoted lines

> Le 7 août 2025 à 05:20, Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com> a écrit :
> 
> For better readability, convert the if-else tower into a switch
> statement.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
> ---
> remote.c | 19 ++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/remote.c b/remote.c
> index 465e0ea0eb..029b1fa93b 100644
> --- a/remote.c
> +++ b/remote.c
> @@ -1171,7 +1171,6 @@ static void show_push_unqualified_ref_name_error(const char *dst_value,
>                         const char *matched_src_name)
> {
>    struct object_id oid;
> -    enum object_type type;
> 
>    /*
>     * TRANSLATORS: "matches '%s'%" is the <dst> part of "git push
> @@ -1196,30 +1195,36 @@ static void show_push_unqualified_ref_name_error(const char *dst_value,
>        BUG("'%s' is not a valid object, "
>            "match_explicit_lhs() should catch this!",
>            matched_src_name);
> -    type = odb_read_object_info(the_repository->objects, &oid, NULL);
> -    if (type == OBJ_COMMIT) {
> +
> +    switch (odb_read_object_info(the_repository->objects, &oid, NULL)) {
> +    case OBJ_COMMIT:
>        advise(_("The <src> part of the refspec is a commit object.\n"
>             "Did you mean to create a new branch by pushing to\n"
>             "'%s:refs/heads/%s'?"),
>               matched_src_name, dst_value);
> -    } else if (type == OBJ_TAG) {
> +        break;
> +    case OBJ_TAG:
>        advise(_("The <src> part of the refspec is a tag object.\n"
>             "Did you mean to create a new tag by pushing to\n"
>             "'%s:refs/tags/%s'?"),
>               matched_src_name, dst_value);
> -    } else if (type == OBJ_TREE) {
> +        break;
> +    case OBJ_TREE:
>        advise(_("The <src> part of the refspec is a tree object.\n"
>             "Did you mean to tag a new tree by pushing to\n"
>             "'%s:refs/tags/%s'?"),
>               matched_src_name, dst_value);
> -    } else if (type == OBJ_BLOB) {
> +        break;
> +    case OBJ_BLOB:
>        advise(_("The <src> part of the refspec is a blob object.\n"
>             "Did you mean to tag a new blob by pushing to\n"
>             "'%s:refs/tags/%s'?"),
>               matched_src_name, dst_value);
> -    } else {
> +        break;
> +    default:
>        advise(_("The <src> part of the refspec ('%s') is an object ID that doesn't exist.\n"),
>               matched_src_name);
> +        break;
>    }
> }
> 
> 
> Range-diff against v1:

Don’t we normally put single-patch notes like a range-diff right after the triple dash? I have a feeling this format breaks git-am on the receiving side, though I haven’t actually tried it.

Show 29 quoted lines

> 1:  5866818859 ! 1:  54a16614e2 remote.c: convert if-else tower to switch
>    @@ Commit message
> 
>      ## remote.c ##
>     @@ remote.c: static void show_push_unqualified_ref_name_error(const char *dst_value,
>    +                         const char *matched_src_name)
>    + {
>    +    struct object_id oid;
>    +-    enum object_type type;
>    +
>    +    /*
>    +     * TRANSLATORS: "matches '%s'%" is the <dst> part of "git push
>    +@@ remote.c: static void show_push_unqualified_ref_name_error(const char *dst_value,
>    +        BUG("'%s' is not a valid object, "
>                  "match_explicit_lhs() should catch this!",
>                  matched_src_name);
>    -    type = odb_read_object_info(the_repository->objects, &oid, NULL);
>    +-    type = odb_read_object_info(the_repository->objects, &oid, NULL);
>     -    if (type == OBJ_COMMIT) {
>    -+    switch (type) {
>    ++
>    ++    switch (odb_read_object_info(the_repository->objects, &oid, NULL)) {
>     +    case OBJ_COMMIT:
>              advise(_("The <src> part of the refspec is a commit object.\n"
>                   "Did you mean to create a new branch by pushing to\n"
> --
> 2.50.1
> 
>