Re: [RFC PATCH v2] revision: new rev^-n shorthand for rev^n..rev
- From
Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
- Date
- Sep 25, 2016, 10:25 UTC
- Message-ID
- <vpq4m54wa1l.fsf@anie.imag.fr>
- In-Reply-To
- <20160925085511.12515-1-vegard.nossum@oracle.com>
Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@oracle.com> writes:
> Documentation/revisions.txt | 14 +++++++ > builtin/rev-parse.c | 28 ++++++++++++++ > revision.c | 91 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > revision.h | 1 +
This would obviously need tests before you can drop the RFC flag.
Show 13 quoted lines
> --- builtin/rev-parse.c
> +++ builtin/rev-parse.c
> @@ -292,6 +292,32 @@ static int try_difference(const char *arg)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int try_parent_exclusion(const char *arg)
> +{
> + int ret = 0;
> + char *to_rev = NULL;
> + char *from_rev = NULL;
> + unsigned char to_sha1[20];
> + unsigned char from_sha1[20];I didn't follow closely, but there are patch series by brian m. carlson to convert these unsigned char array[20] to struct object_id. I guess adding more arrays is going in the wrong direction. You may want to Cc brian if unsure.
-- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/