From: Junio C Hamano Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 16:41:40 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] shorten_unambiguous_ref(): avoid sscanf() Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Jeff King writes: > I had a similar thought, but I think it is fooled by "refs/heads/%foo". > The correct shortening there is "%foo". But we'd parse the > "refs/heads/%.*s" rule up to the ".", and then complain that they do not > match. Yeah, you're right.