threads / patch / 60446

patchsequencer: remove use of comment character

Subject: [PATCH] sequencer: remove use of comment character

## tl;dr

18 messages between Oct 30, 2023 and Nov 1, 2023. Diffs are folded; open one to read it.

replies: 17people: 4as markdown or json

Tony Tung via GitGitGadget· Oct 30, 2023, 03:08 UTC · lore
From: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>

Instead of using the hardcoded `# `, use the user-defined comment_line_char. Adds a test to prevent regressions.

Signed-off-by: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>
---
    sequencer: remove use of hardcoded comment char
    
    Instead of using the hardcoded # , use the user-defined
    comment_line_char. Adds a test to prevent regressions.
Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-1603%2Fttung%2Fttung%2Fcommentchar-v1
Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-1603/ttung/ttung/commentchar-v1
Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/1603
 sequencer.c                   |  5 +++--
 t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Show changes to 2 files +42 −2

sequencer.c, t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh

diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index d584cac8ed9..8c6666d5e43 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c
@@ -6082,8 +6082,9 @@ static int add_decorations_to_list(const struct commit *commit,
 		/* If the branch is checked out, then leave a comment instead. */
 		if ((path = branch_checked_out(decoration->name))) {
 			item->command = TODO_COMMENT;
-			strbuf_addf(ctx->buf, "# Ref %s checked out at '%s'\n",
-				    decoration->name, path);
+			strbuf_commented_addf(ctx->buf, comment_line_char,
+					      "Ref %s checked out at '%s'\n",
+					      decoration->name, path);
 		} else {
 			struct string_list_item *sti;
 			item->command = TODO_UPDATE_REF;
diff --git a/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh b/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
index 8ea2bf13026..076dca87871 100755
--- a/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
+++ b/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
@@ -1839,6 +1839,45 @@ test_expect_success '--update-refs adds label and update-ref commands' '
 	)
 '
 
+test_expect_success '--update-refs works with core.commentChar' '
+	git checkout -b update-refs-with-commentchar no-conflict-branch &&
+	test_config core.commentChar : &&
+	git branch -f base HEAD~4 &&
+	git branch -f first HEAD~3 &&
+	git branch -f second HEAD~3 &&
+	git branch -f third HEAD~1 &&
+	git commit --allow-empty --fixup=third &&
+	git branch -f is-not-reordered &&
+	git commit --allow-empty --fixup=HEAD~4 &&
+	git branch -f shared-tip &&
+	git checkout update-refs &&
+	(
+		write_script fake-editor.sh <<-\EOF &&
+		grep "^[^:]" "$1"
+		exit 1
+		EOF
+		test_set_editor "$(pwd)/fake-editor.sh" &&
+
+		cat >expect <<-EOF &&
+		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h J) J
+		fixup $(git log -1 --format=%h update-refs) fixup! J : empty
+		update-ref refs/heads/second
+		update-ref refs/heads/first
+		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h K) K
+		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h L) L
+		fixup $(git log -1 --format=%h is-not-reordered) fixup! L : empty
+		update-ref refs/heads/third
+		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h M) M
+		update-ref refs/heads/no-conflict-branch
+		update-ref refs/heads/is-not-reordered
+		update-ref refs/heads/update-refs-with-commentchar
+		EOF
+
+		test_must_fail git rebase -i --autosquash --update-refs primary shared-tip >todo &&
+		test_cmp expect todo
+	)
+'
+
 test_expect_success '--update-refs adds commands with --rebase-merges' '
 	git checkout -b update-refs-with-merge no-conflict-branch &&
 	git branch -f base HEAD~4 &&

base-commit: 2e8e77cbac8ac17f94eee2087187fa1718e38b14

-- 
gitgitgadget
Junio C Hamano· Oct 30, 2023, 04:00 UTC · re: Tony Tung via GitGitGadget · lore

Re: [PATCH] sequencer: remove use of comment character

"Tony Tung via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
Show 5 quoted lines
> From: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>
>
> Instead of using the hardcoded `# `, use the
> user-defined comment_line_char.  Adds a test
> to prevent regressions.
Good spotting.
Two observations.
 (1) There are a few more places that need similar treatment in the
     same file; you may want to fix them all while at it.
 (2) The second argument to strbuf_commented_addf() is always the
     comment_line_char global variable, not just inside this file
     but all callers across the codebase.  We probably should drop
     it and have the strbuf_commented_addf() helper itself refer to
     the global.  That way, if we ever want to change the global
     variable reference to something else (e.g. function call), we
     only have to touch a single place.

The latter is meant as #leftoverbits and will be a lot wider clean-up that we may want to do long after this patch hits out codebase. The "other places" I spotted for the former are the following, but needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt, as it has not even been compile tested.

Thanks.
 sequencer.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Show changes to diff +4 −4
diff --git c/sequencer.c w/sequencer.c
index d584cac8ed..33208b1660 100644
--- c/sequencer.c
+++ w/sequencer.c
@@ -1893,8 +1893,8 @@ static void update_squash_message_for_fixup(struct strbuf *msg)
 	size_t orig_msg_len;
 	int i = 1;
 
-	strbuf_addf(&buf1, "# %s\n", _(first_commit_msg_str));
-	strbuf_addf(&buf2, "# %s\n", _(skip_first_commit_msg_str));
+	strbuf_addf(&buf1, comment_line_char, "%s\n", _(first_commit_msg_str));
+	strbuf_addf(&buf2, comment_line_char, "%s\n", _(skip_first_commit_msg_str));
 	s = start = orig_msg = strbuf_detach(msg, &orig_msg_len);
 	while (s) {
 		const char *next;
@@ -2269,8 +2269,8 @@ static int do_pick_commit(struct repository *r,
 		next = parent;
 		next_label = msg.parent_label;
 		if (opts->commit_use_reference) {
-			strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf,
-				"# *** SAY WHY WE ARE REVERTING ON THE TITLE LINE ***");
+			strbuf_commented_addf(&msgbuf, comment_line_char, "%s",
+				"*** SAY WHY WE ARE REVERTING ON THE TITLE LINE ***");
 		} else if (skip_prefix(msg.subject, "Revert \"", &orig_subject) &&
 			   /*
 			    * We don't touch pre-existing repeated reverts, because
Elijah Newren· Oct 30, 2023, 17:26 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: [PATCH] sequencer: remove use of comment character

On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 9:01 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 62 quoted lines
>
> "Tony Tung via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > From: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>
> >
> > Instead of using the hardcoded `# `, use the
> > user-defined comment_line_char.  Adds a test
> > to prevent regressions.
>
> Good spotting.
>
> Two observations.
>
>  (1) There are a few more places that need similar treatment in the
>      same file; you may want to fix them all while at it.
>
>  (2) The second argument to strbuf_commented_addf() is always the
>      comment_line_char global variable, not just inside this file
>      but all callers across the codebase.  We probably should drop
>      it and have the strbuf_commented_addf() helper itself refer to
>      the global.  That way, if we ever want to change the global
>      variable reference to something else (e.g. function call), we
>      only have to touch a single place.
>
> The latter is meant as #leftoverbits and will be a lot wider
> clean-up that we may want to do long after this patch hits out
> codebase.  The "other places" I spotted for the former are the
> following, but needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt, as it
> has not even been compile tested.
>
> Thanks.
>
>  sequencer.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git c/sequencer.c w/sequencer.c
> index d584cac8ed..33208b1660 100644
> --- c/sequencer.c
> +++ w/sequencer.c
> @@ -1893,8 +1893,8 @@ static void update_squash_message_for_fixup(struct strbuf *msg)
>         size_t orig_msg_len;
>         int i = 1;
>
> -       strbuf_addf(&buf1, "# %s\n", _(first_commit_msg_str));
> -       strbuf_addf(&buf2, "# %s\n", _(skip_first_commit_msg_str));
> +       strbuf_addf(&buf1, comment_line_char, "%s\n", _(first_commit_msg_str));
> +       strbuf_addf(&buf2, comment_line_char, "%s\n", _(skip_first_commit_msg_str));
>         s = start = orig_msg = strbuf_detach(msg, &orig_msg_len);
>         while (s) {
>                 const char *next;
> @@ -2269,8 +2269,8 @@ static int do_pick_commit(struct repository *r,
>                 next = parent;
>                 next_label = msg.parent_label;
>                 if (opts->commit_use_reference) {
> -                       strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf,
> -                               "# *** SAY WHY WE ARE REVERTING ON THE TITLE LINE ***");
> +                       strbuf_commented_addf(&msgbuf, comment_line_char, "%s",
> +                               "*** SAY WHY WE ARE REVERTING ON THE TITLE LINE ***");
>                 } else if (skip_prefix(msg.subject, "Revert \"", &orig_subject) &&
>                            /*
>                             * We don't touch pre-existing repeated reverts, because
>

I thought the point of the comment_line_char was so that commit messages could have lines starting with '#'. That rationale doesn't apply to the TODO list generation or parsing, and I'm not sure if we want to add the same complexity there. If we do want to add the same complexity there, I'm worried that making these changes are insufficent; there are some other hardcoded '#' references in the code (as a quick greps for '".*#' and "'#'" will turn up). Since those other references include parsing as well as generation, I think we might actually be introducing bugs in the TODO list handling if we only partially convert it, but someone would need to double check.

Junio C Hamano· Oct 30, 2023, 23:35 UTC · re: Elijah Newren · lore

Re: [PATCH] sequencer: remove use of comment character

Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
> I thought the point of the comment_line_char was so that commit
> messages could have lines starting with '#'.  That rationale doesn't
> apply to the TODO list generation or parsing, and I'm not sure if we
> want to add the same complexity there.

Thanks for a healthy dose of sanity. I noticed existing use of comment_line_char everywhere in sequencer.c and assumed we would want to be consistent, but you are right to point out that they are all about the COMMIT_EDITMSG kind of thing, and not about what appears in "sequencer/todo".

Tony Tung· Oct 31, 2023, 04:42 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: [PATCH] sequencer: remove use of comment character

Show 14 quoted lines
> On Oct 30, 2023, at 4:35 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> I thought the point of the comment_line_char was so that commit
>> messages could have lines starting with '#'.  That rationale doesn't
>> apply to the TODO list generation or parsing, and I'm not sure if we
>> want to add the same complexity there.
> 
> Thanks for a healthy dose of sanity.  I noticed existing use of
> comment_line_char everywhere in sequencer.c and assumed we would
> want to be consistent, but you are right to point out that they are
> all about the COMMIT_EDITMSG kind of thing, and not about what
> appears in "sequencer/todo”.
I believe comment_line_char is being applied when the sequencer reads back the instructions, which is why I ran into this problem to begin with.
If the intent is not to apply it to the sequencer, then the bugfix is in the wrong place.
Thanks
Tony Tung· Oct 31, 2023, 04:50 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: [PATCH] sequencer: remove use of comment character

Show 14 quoted lines
> On Oct 30, 2023, at 4:35 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> I thought the point of the comment_line_char was so that commit
>> messages could have lines starting with '#'.  That rationale doesn't
>> apply to the TODO list generation or parsing, and I'm not sure if we
>> want to add the same complexity there.
> 
> Thanks for a healthy dose of sanity.  I noticed existing use of
> comment_line_char everywhere in sequencer.c and assumed we would
> want to be consistent, but you are right to point out that they are
> all about the COMMIT_EDITMSG kind of thing, and not about what
> appears in "sequencer/todo”.
Actually, I withdraw my previous comment.  comment_line_char is all over sequencer.c, and there are tests that say, "rebase -i respects core.commentchar”, which strongly implies that the *intent* is that rebase -i respects comment_line_char.
I would propose that we move forward with this, except perhaps removing more instances of comment_line_char.
Thanks.
Junio C Hamano· Oct 31, 2023, 05:33 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: [PATCH] sequencer: remove use of comment character

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
Show 6 quoted lines
> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I thought the point of the comment_line_char was so that commit
>> messages could have lines starting with '#'.  That rationale doesn't
>> apply to the TODO list generation or parsing, and I'm not sure if we
>> want to add the same complexity there.
Earlier I said
Show 5 quoted lines
> Thanks for a healthy dose of sanity.  I noticed existing use of
> comment_line_char everywhere in sequencer.c and assumed we would
> want to be consistent, but you are right to point out that they are
> all about the COMMIT_EDITMSG kind of thing, and not about what
> appears in "sequencer/todo".
but with something as simple as
    $ git -c core.commentchar='@' rebase -i master seen^2

I can see that the references to comment_line_char in sequencer.c are about the commented lines after the list of insn in the generated sequencer/todo file, so even though the rationale does not apply, isn't this already "broken" in the current code anyway?

Thanks.
Elijah Newren· Oct 31, 2023, 06:20 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: [PATCH] sequencer: remove use of comment character

On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 10:33 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 26 quoted lines
>
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>
> > Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> I thought the point of the comment_line_char was so that commit
> >> messages could have lines starting with '#'.  That rationale doesn't
> >> apply to the TODO list generation or parsing, and I'm not sure if we
> >> want to add the same complexity there.
>
> Earlier I said
>
> > Thanks for a healthy dose of sanity.  I noticed existing use of
> > comment_line_char everywhere in sequencer.c and assumed we would
> > want to be consistent, but you are right to point out that they are
> > all about the COMMIT_EDITMSG kind of thing, and not about what
> > appears in "sequencer/todo".
>
> but with something as simple as
>
>     $ git -c core.commentchar='@' rebase -i master seen^2
>
> I can see that the references to comment_line_char in sequencer.c
> are about the commented lines after the list of insn in the
> generated sequencer/todo file, so even though the rationale does not
> apply, isn't this already "broken" in the current code anyway?

Yes, I believe it is. However, I remember specifically looking at cases with --rebase-merges about a year and a half ago, and noted that there was a mixture of hardcoded '#' references along with comment_line_char. I noted at the time that changing comment_line_char looked like it had a bug, and that the parsing in particular would be fooled and do wrong things if it changed. Unfortunately, I can't find any notes from the time with the details, so I don't remember exactly what or how it was triggered.

However, I do suspect that the references to comment_line_char in the `rebase -i` codepaths was not for any actual intended purpose, but just noting that they were used elsewhere in the file (for COMMIT_EDITMSG, where it made sense) and just mimicking that code without realizing the lack of rationale. That would have been mere wasted effort had the comment_line_char been consistently supported in the TODO file editing and parsing, but it wasn't, which left TODO editing & parsing somewhat broken.

I think supporting comment_line_char for the TODO file provides no value, and I think the easier fix would be undoing the uses of comment_line_char relative to the TODO file (perhaps also leaving in-code comments to the effect that comment_line_char just doesn't apply to the TODO file).

However, if someone prefers to make the TODO file also respect
comment_line_char, despite its dubious value, then I expect any patch
should
  1) audit *every* reference found via git grep -e '".*#' -e "'#'" sequencer.c
  2) add a test case (or cases) involving --rebase-merges -i that
trigger the relevant code paths
If they don't do that, then I fear we might make the bug more likely
to be triggered rather than less.
Tony Tung via GitGitGadget· Oct 31, 2023, 05:09 UTC · re: Tony Tung via GitGitGadget · lore

[PATCH v2 0/2] sequencer: remove use of hardcoded comment char

Instead of using the hardcoded # , use the user-defined comment_line_char. Adds a test to prevent regressions.

Tony Tung (2):
  sequencer: remove use of comment character
  sequencer: fix remaining hardcoded comment char
 sequencer.c                   | 21 +++++++++++++------
 t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
base-commit: 2e8e77cbac8ac17f94eee2087187fa1718e38b14
Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-1603%2Fttung%2Fttung%2Fcommentchar-v2
Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-1603/ttung/ttung/commentchar-v2
Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/1603
Range-diff vs v1:
 1:  10598a56d64 = 1:  10598a56d64 sequencer: remove use of comment character
 -:  ----------- > 2:  c9f4ff34dbd sequencer: fix remaining hardcoded comment char
-- 
gitgitgadget
Tony Tung via GitGitGadget· Oct 31, 2023, 05:09 UTC · re: Tony Tung via GitGitGadget · lore

[PATCH v2 1/2] sequencer: remove use of comment character

From: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>

Instead of using the hardcoded `# `, use the user-defined comment_line_char. Adds a test to prevent regressions.

Signed-off-by: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>
---
 sequencer.c                   |  5 +++--
 t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Show changes to 2 files +42 −2

sequencer.c, t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh

diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index d584cac8ed9..8c6666d5e43 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c
@@ -6082,8 +6082,9 @@ static int add_decorations_to_list(const struct commit *commit,
 		/* If the branch is checked out, then leave a comment instead. */
 		if ((path = branch_checked_out(decoration->name))) {
 			item->command = TODO_COMMENT;
-			strbuf_addf(ctx->buf, "# Ref %s checked out at '%s'\n",
-				    decoration->name, path);
+			strbuf_commented_addf(ctx->buf, comment_line_char,
+					      "Ref %s checked out at '%s'\n",
+					      decoration->name, path);
 		} else {
 			struct string_list_item *sti;
 			item->command = TODO_UPDATE_REF;
diff --git a/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh b/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
index 8ea2bf13026..076dca87871 100755
--- a/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
+++ b/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
@@ -1839,6 +1839,45 @@ test_expect_success '--update-refs adds label and update-ref commands' '
 	)
 '
 
+test_expect_success '--update-refs works with core.commentChar' '
+	git checkout -b update-refs-with-commentchar no-conflict-branch &&
+	test_config core.commentChar : &&
+	git branch -f base HEAD~4 &&
+	git branch -f first HEAD~3 &&
+	git branch -f second HEAD~3 &&
+	git branch -f third HEAD~1 &&
+	git commit --allow-empty --fixup=third &&
+	git branch -f is-not-reordered &&
+	git commit --allow-empty --fixup=HEAD~4 &&
+	git branch -f shared-tip &&
+	git checkout update-refs &&
+	(
+		write_script fake-editor.sh <<-\EOF &&
+		grep "^[^:]" "$1"
+		exit 1
+		EOF
+		test_set_editor "$(pwd)/fake-editor.sh" &&
+
+		cat >expect <<-EOF &&
+		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h J) J
+		fixup $(git log -1 --format=%h update-refs) fixup! J : empty
+		update-ref refs/heads/second
+		update-ref refs/heads/first
+		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h K) K
+		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h L) L
+		fixup $(git log -1 --format=%h is-not-reordered) fixup! L : empty
+		update-ref refs/heads/third
+		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h M) M
+		update-ref refs/heads/no-conflict-branch
+		update-ref refs/heads/is-not-reordered
+		update-ref refs/heads/update-refs-with-commentchar
+		EOF
+
+		test_must_fail git rebase -i --autosquash --update-refs primary shared-tip >todo &&
+		test_cmp expect todo
+	)
+'
+
 test_expect_success '--update-refs adds commands with --rebase-merges' '
 	git checkout -b update-refs-with-merge no-conflict-branch &&
 	git branch -f base HEAD~4 &&

-- 
gitgitgadget
Phillip Wood· Oct 31, 2023, 11:43 UTC · re: Tony Tung via GitGitGadget · lore

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sequencer: remove use of comment character

Hi Tony
On 31/10/2023 05:09, Tony Tung via GitGitGadget wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> From: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>
> 
> Instead of using the hardcoded `# `, use the
> user-defined comment_line_char.  Adds a test
> to prevent regressions.

Well spotted and thanks for fixing this. Normally we wrap the commit message at ~72 chars.

Show 29 quoted lines
> Signed-off-by: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>
> ---
>   sequencer.c                   |  5 +++--
>   t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
> index d584cac8ed9..8c6666d5e43 100644
> --- a/sequencer.c
> +++ b/sequencer.c
> @@ -6082,8 +6082,9 @@ static int add_decorations_to_list(const struct commit *commit,
>   		/* If the branch is checked out, then leave a comment instead. */
>   		if ((path = branch_checked_out(decoration->name))) {
>   			item->command = TODO_COMMENT;
> -			strbuf_addf(ctx->buf, "# Ref %s checked out at '%s'\n",
> -				    decoration->name, path);
> +			strbuf_commented_addf(ctx->buf, comment_line_char,
> +					      "Ref %s checked out at '%s'\n",
> +					      decoration->name, path);
>   		} else {
>   			struct string_list_item *sti;
>   			item->command = TODO_UPDATE_REF;
> diff --git a/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh b/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
> index 8ea2bf13026..076dca87871 100755
> --- a/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
> +++ b/t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh
> @@ -1839,6 +1839,45 @@ test_expect_success '--update-refs adds label and update-ref commands' '
>   	)
>   '

Thank you for taking the time to add a test. I think it could be simplified though as all we really need to do is check that the expected comment is present in the todo list. Something like (untested)

test_expect_success '--update-refs works with core.commentChar' '
	git worktree add new-branch &&
	test_when_finished "git worktree remove new-branch" &&
	test_config core.commentchar : &&
	write_script fake-editor.sh <<-\EOF &&
	grep "^: Ref refs/heads/new-branch checked out at .*new-branch" "$1" &&
	# no need to rebase
	>"$1"
	EOF
	(
		test_set_editor "$(pwd)/fake-editor.sh" &&
		git rebase -i --update-refs HEAD^
	)
'
Best Wishes
Phillip
Show 42 quoted lines
> +test_expect_success '--update-refs works with core.commentChar' '
> +	git checkout -b update-refs-with-commentchar no-conflict-branch &&
> +	test_config core.commentChar : &&
> +	git branch -f base HEAD~4 &&
> +	git branch -f first HEAD~3 &&
> +	git branch -f second HEAD~3 &&
> +	git branch -f third HEAD~1 &&
> +	git commit --allow-empty --fixup=third &&
> +	git branch -f is-not-reordered &&
> +	git commit --allow-empty --fixup=HEAD~4 &&
> +	git branch -f shared-tip &&
> +	git checkout update-refs &&
> +	(
> +		write_script fake-editor.sh <<-\EOF &&
> +		grep "^[^:]" "$1"
> +		exit 1
> +		EOF
> +		test_set_editor "$(pwd)/fake-editor.sh" &&
> +
> +		cat >expect <<-EOF &&
> +		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h J) J
> +		fixup $(git log -1 --format=%h update-refs) fixup! J : empty
> +		update-ref refs/heads/second
> +		update-ref refs/heads/first
> +		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h K) K
> +		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h L) L
> +		fixup $(git log -1 --format=%h is-not-reordered) fixup! L : empty
> +		update-ref refs/heads/third
> +		pick $(git log -1 --format=%h M) M
> +		update-ref refs/heads/no-conflict-branch
> +		update-ref refs/heads/is-not-reordered
> +		update-ref refs/heads/update-refs-with-commentchar
> +		EOF
> +
> +		test_must_fail git rebase -i --autosquash --update-refs primary shared-tip >todo &&
> +		test_cmp expect todo
> +	)
> +'
> +
>   test_expect_success '--update-refs adds commands with --rebase-merges' '
>   	git checkout -b update-refs-with-merge no-conflict-branch &&
>   	git branch -f base HEAD~4 &&
Junio C Hamano· Nov 1, 2023, 04:59 UTC · re: Tony Tung via GitGitGadget · lore

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sequencer: remove use of comment character

"Tony Tung via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sequencer: remove use of comment character

The patch does not seem to be doing that, though. It may have removed '#' in "# Ref", but still uses comment_line_char, so it does not remove use at all (and we do not want to, of course).

"use the core.commentchar consistently"
Show 5 quoted lines
> From: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>
>
> Instead of using the hardcoded `# `, use the
> user-defined comment_line_char.  Adds a test
> to prevent regressions.
Overly short lines.

The readers cannot tell where in the output the hardcoded # appears with the above description. I am guessing that it is in comments in the sequencer/todo file that mark commits that are at the tip of branches that are checked out, but there may be more specific circumstances in which the comment is used, like "when rebase -i is used with the --update-refs option", if so that also need to be told to the readers.

Describe the condition well enough so that readers can easily see the defect the patch attempts to fix.

Show 5 quoted lines
> -			strbuf_addf(ctx->buf, "# Ref %s checked out at '%s'\n",
> -				    decoration->name, path);
> +			strbuf_commented_addf(ctx->buf, comment_line_char,
> +					      "Ref %s checked out at '%s'\n",
> +					      decoration->name, path);
OK.
Tony Tung via GitGitGadget· Oct 31, 2023, 05:09 UTC · re: Tony Tung via GitGitGadget · lore

[PATCH v2 2/2] sequencer: fix remaining hardcoded comment char

From: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>
Signed-off-by: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>
---
 sequencer.c | 18 +++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Show changes to sequencer.c +13 −5
diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index 8c6666d5e43..bbadc3fb710 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c
@@ -1893,8 +1893,14 @@ static void update_squash_message_for_fixup(struct strbuf *msg)
 	size_t orig_msg_len;
 	int i = 1;
 
-	strbuf_addf(&buf1, "# %s\n", _(first_commit_msg_str));
-	strbuf_addf(&buf2, "# %s\n", _(skip_first_commit_msg_str));
+	strbuf_commented_addf(&buf1,
+			      comment_line_char,
+			      "%s\n",
+			      _(first_commit_msg_str));
+	strbuf_commented_addf(&buf2,
+			      comment_line_char,
+			      "%s\n",
+			      _(skip_first_commit_msg_str));
 	s = start = orig_msg = strbuf_detach(msg, &orig_msg_len);
 	while (s) {
 		const char *next;
@@ -2269,8 +2275,9 @@ static int do_pick_commit(struct repository *r,
 		next = parent;
 		next_label = msg.parent_label;
 		if (opts->commit_use_reference) {
-			strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf,
-				"# *** SAY WHY WE ARE REVERTING ON THE TITLE LINE ***");
+			strbuf_commented_addf(&msgbuf,
+					      "%s",
+					      "*** SAY WHY WE ARE REVERTING ON THE TITLE LINE ***");
 		} else if (skip_prefix(msg.subject, "Revert \"", &orig_subject) &&
 			   /*
 			    * We don't touch pre-existing repeated reverts, because
@@ -6082,7 +6089,8 @@ static int add_decorations_to_list(const struct commit *commit,
 		/* If the branch is checked out, then leave a comment instead. */
 		if ((path = branch_checked_out(decoration->name))) {
 			item->command = TODO_COMMENT;
-			strbuf_commented_addf(ctx->buf, comment_line_char,
+			strbuf_commented_addf(ctx->buf,
+					      comment_line_char,
 					      "Ref %s checked out at '%s'\n",
 					      decoration->name, path);
 		} else {

-- 
gitgitgadget
Phillip Wood· Oct 31, 2023, 11:27 UTC · re: Tony Tung via GitGitGadget · lore

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] sequencer: fix remaining hardcoded comment char

Hi Tony

Thanks for working on this. When you're submitting patches please try testing them locally and check the CI before doing '/submit'. In this case all the jobs that try to compile git are failing - see https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/actions/runs/6702301267/job/18211090139?pr=1603#step:4:260 for example.

On 31/10/2023 05:09, Tony Tung via GitGitGadget wrote:
Show 21 quoted lines
> From: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tony Tung <tonytung@merly.org>
> ---
>   sequencer.c | 18 +++++++++++++-----
>   1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
> index 8c6666d5e43..bbadc3fb710 100644
> --- a/sequencer.c
> +++ b/sequencer.c
> @@ -1893,8 +1893,14 @@ static void update_squash_message_for_fixup(struct strbuf *msg)
>   	size_t orig_msg_len;
>   	int i = 1;
>   
> -	strbuf_addf(&buf1, "# %s\n", _(first_commit_msg_str));
> -	strbuf_addf(&buf2, "# %s\n", _(skip_first_commit_msg_str));
> +	strbuf_commented_addf(&buf1,
> +			      comment_line_char,
> +			      "%s\n",
> +			      _(first_commit_msg_str));
This is what is causing the compilation the fail. It should be
	strbuf_commented_addf(&buf1, "%c $s\n", comment_char_line,
			      _(first_commit_msg_str));
> +	strbuf_commented_addf(&buf2,
> +			      comment_line_char,
> +			      "%s\n",
> +			      _(skip_first_commit_msg_str));
This needs changing in the same way.
It would be nice to add a test for this. I think we can do that by adding
	test_config core.commentchar :

To the beginning of the test '--skip after failed fixup cleans commit message' in t3418-rebase-continue.sh and changing the expected message so that it uses ':' instead of '#' for the comments.

Show 24 quoted lines
>   	s = start = orig_msg = strbuf_detach(msg, &orig_msg_len);
>   	while (s) {
>   		const char *next;
> @@ -2269,8 +2275,9 @@ static int do_pick_commit(struct repository *r,
>   		next = parent;
>   		next_label = msg.parent_label;
>   		if (opts->commit_use_reference) {
> -			strbuf_addstr(&msgbuf,
> -				"# *** SAY WHY WE ARE REVERTING ON THE TITLE LINE ***");
> +			strbuf_commented_addf(&msgbuf,
> +					      "%s",
> +					      "*** SAY WHY WE ARE REVERTING ON THE TITLE LINE ***");
>   		} else if (skip_prefix(msg.subject, "Revert \"", &orig_subject) &&
>   			   /*
>   			    * We don't touch pre-existing repeated reverts, because
> @@ -6082,7 +6089,8 @@ static int add_decorations_to_list(const struct commit *commit,
>   		/* If the branch is checked out, then leave a comment instead. */
>   		if ((path = branch_checked_out(decoration->name))) {
>   			item->command = TODO_COMMENT;
> -			strbuf_commented_addf(ctx->buf, comment_line_char,
> +			strbuf_commented_addf(ctx->buf,
> +					      comment_line_char,
>   					      "Ref %s checked out at '%s'\n",
>   					      decoration->name, path);

This hunk is unnecessary - it is just changing the code you added in the first patch.

Best Wishes
Phillip
Elijah Newren· Oct 31, 2023, 06:55 UTC · re: Tony Tung via GitGitGadget · lore

Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] sequencer: remove use of hardcoded comment char

Hi,

On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 10:09 PM Tony Tung via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines
>
> Instead of using the hardcoded # , use the user-defined comment_line_char.
> Adds a test to prevent regressions.
>
> Tony Tung (2):
>   sequencer: remove use of comment character
>   sequencer: fix remaining hardcoded comment char

The second commit message seems to suggest that the two commits should just be squashed; there's no explicit or even implicit reason provided for why the two small patches are logically independent. After reading them carefully, and digging through the particular changes being made and what part of the code they touch, I think I can guess at a potential reason, but I feel like I'm crossing into the territory of mind reading trying to articulate that reason. (Besides, my rationale would argue that the two patches should be split differently.) Perhaps a comment could be added, to either the second commit message or the cover letter, to explain that better?

More importantly, though, I think the second commit message is actually wrong. Before and after applying this series:

$ git grep -c -e '".*#' -e "'#'" -- sequencer.c sequencer.c:16

$ b4 am c9f4ff34dbdb7ba221e4203bb6551b80948dc71d.1698728953.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com $ git am ./v2_20231031_gitgitgadget_sequencer_remove_use_of_hardcoded_comment_char.mbx

$ git grep -c -e '".*#' -e "'#'" -- sequencer.c sequencer.c:12

Granted, four of those lines are code comments, but that still leaves 8 hard coded references to '#' in the code at the end (i.e. the majority are still left), meaning your second patch doesn't do what its subject line claims.

And, most important of all is still the first patch. As I stated elsewhere in this thread (at CABPp-BFY7m_g+sT131_Ubxqo5FsHGKOPMng7=90_0-+xCS9NEQ@mail.gmail.com):

""" I think supporting comment_line_char for the TODO file provides no value, and I think the easier fix would be undoing the uses of comment_line_char relative to the TODO file (perhaps also leaving in-code comments to the effect that comment_line_char just doesn't apply to the TODO file).

However, if someone prefers to make the TODO file also respect
comment_line_char, despite its dubious value, then I expect any patch
should
  1) audit *every* reference found via git grep -e '".*#' -e "'#'" sequencer.c
  2) add a test case (or cases) involving --rebase-merges -i that
trigger the relevant code paths
If they don't do that, then I fear we might make the bug more likely
to be triggered rather than less.
"""

Personally, I would rather not accept patches changing the handling of the TODO script relative to comment_line_char until the above is done, and I worry that half measures _might_ end up being more hurtful than helpful.

I feel quite differently about patches that make COMMIT_EDITMSG handling use comment_line_char more consistently since that code simply writes the file without re-parsing it; although fixing everything would be best, even fixing some of them to use comment_line_char would be welcome. I think the first two hunks of your second patch happen to fall into this category, so if those were split out, then I'd say those are good partial solutions.

Phillip Wood· Oct 31, 2023, 11:18 UTC · re: Elijah Newren · lore

Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] sequencer: remove use of hardcoded comment char

Hi Elijah
On 31/10/2023 06:55, Elijah Newren wrote:
Show 34 quoted lines
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 10:09 PM Tony Tung via GitGitGadget
> <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Instead of using the hardcoded # , use the user-defined comment_line_char.
>> Adds a test to prevent regressions.
>>
>> Tony Tung (2):
>>    sequencer: remove use of comment character
>>    sequencer: fix remaining hardcoded comment char
> 
> The second commit message seems to suggest that the two commits should
> just be squashed; there's no explicit or even implicit reason provided
> for why the two small patches are logically independent.  After
> reading them carefully, and digging through the particular changes
> being made and what part of the code they touch, I think I can guess
> at a potential reason, but I feel like I'm crossing into the territory
> of mind reading trying to articulate that reason.  (Besides, my
> rationale would argue that the two patches should be split
> differently.)  Perhaps a comment could be added, to either the second
> commit message or the cover letter, to explain that better?
> 
> More importantly, though, I think the second commit message is
> actually wrong.  Before and after applying this series:
> 
> $ git grep -c -e '".*#' -e "'#'" -- sequencer.c
> sequencer.c:16
> 
> $ b4 am c9f4ff34dbdb7ba221e4203bb6551b80948dc71d.1698728953.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com
> $ git am ./v2_20231031_gitgitgadget_sequencer_remove_use_of_hardcoded_comment_char.mbx
> 
> $ git grep -c -e '".*#' -e "'#'" -- sequencer.c
> sequencer.c:12

As far as I can see those remaining instances are all to do with the '#' that separates a merge subject line from its parents. I don't think we need to complicate things anymore by respecting core.commentchar there as the '#' is not denoting a commented line, it is being used as an intra-line separator instead.

Show 15 quoted lines
> Granted, four of those lines are code comments, but that still leaves
> 8 hard coded references to '#' in the code at the end (i.e. the
> majority are still left), meaning your second patch doesn't do what
> its subject line claims.
> 
> And, most important of all is still the first patch.  As I stated
> elsewhere in this thread (at
> CABPp-BFY7m_g+sT131_Ubxqo5FsHGKOPMng7=90_0-+xCS9NEQ@mail.gmail.com):
> 
> """
> I think supporting comment_line_char for the TODO file provides no
> value, and I think the easier fix would be undoing the uses of
> comment_line_char relative to the TODO file (perhaps also leaving
> in-code comments to the effect that comment_line_char just doesn't
> apply to the TODO file).

I agree that I don't see much point in respecting core.commentchar in the TODO file as unlike a commit message a legitimate non-commented line will never begin with '#'. Unfortunately I think we're committed to respecting it - see 180bad3d10f (rebase -i: respect core.commentchar, 2013-02-11)

Show 8 quoted lines
> [...] 
> I feel quite differently about patches that make COMMIT_EDITMSG
> handling use comment_line_char more consistently since that code
> simply writes the file without re-parsing it; although fixing
> everything would be best, even fixing some of them to use
> comment_line_char would be welcome.  I think the first two hunks of
> your second patch happen to fall into this category, so if those were
> split out, then I'd say those are good partial solutions.

I think splitting the changes so that we have one patch that fixes the TODO file generation and another that fixes the commit message generation for fixup commands would be best.

Best Wishes
Phillip
Junio C Hamano· Nov 1, 2023, 00:16 UTC · re: Phillip Wood · lore

Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] sequencer: remove use of hardcoded comment char

Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
Show 5 quoted lines
> As far as I can see those remaining instances are all to do with the
> '#' that separates a merge subject line from its parents. I don't
> think we need to complicate things anymore by respecting
> core.commentchar there as the '#' is not denoting a commented line, it
> is being used as an intra-line separator instead.

It is unfortunate that the format of the file needs an intra-line separator in the first place, but I tend to agree with you that the comment-line-char would be a terrible fit there. '#' or any replacement character at the beginning of a line is easy to spot as a signal that the line in its entirety is commented out, but it is much harder to eyeball-spot a single punctuation character in the middle of a line. If we do not have to look for a different character depending on the comment-line-char setting, it would make the system (slightly) easier to use.

Show 5 quoted lines
> I agree that I don't see much point in respecting core.commentchar in
> the TODO file as unlike a commit message a legitimate non-commented
> line will never begin with '#'. Unfortunately I think we're committed
> to respecting it - see 180bad3d10f (rebase -i: respect
> core.commentchar, 2013-02-11)
Yeah, the ship has long sailed.
> I think splitting the changes so that we have one patch that fixes the
> TODO file generation and another that fixes the commit message
> generation for fixup commands would be best.
Yes, it would be great.
Thanks.
Elijah Newren· Nov 1, 2023, 00:21 UTC · re: Phillip Wood · lore

Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] sequencer: remove use of hardcoded comment char

On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 4:18 AM Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 44 quoted lines
>
> Hi Elijah
>
> On 31/10/2023 06:55, Elijah Newren wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 10:09 PM Tony Tung via GitGitGadget
> > <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Instead of using the hardcoded # , use the user-defined comment_line_char.
> >> Adds a test to prevent regressions.
> >>
> >> Tony Tung (2):
> >>    sequencer: remove use of comment character
> >>    sequencer: fix remaining hardcoded comment char
> >
> > The second commit message seems to suggest that the two commits should
> > just be squashed; there's no explicit or even implicit reason provided
> > for why the two small patches are logically independent.  After
> > reading them carefully, and digging through the particular changes
> > being made and what part of the code they touch, I think I can guess
> > at a potential reason, but I feel like I'm crossing into the territory
> > of mind reading trying to articulate that reason.  (Besides, my
> > rationale would argue that the two patches should be split
> > differently.)  Perhaps a comment could be added, to either the second
> > commit message or the cover letter, to explain that better?
> >
> > More importantly, though, I think the second commit message is
> > actually wrong.  Before and after applying this series:
> >
> > $ git grep -c -e '".*#' -e "'#'" -- sequencer.c
> > sequencer.c:16
> >
> > $ b4 am c9f4ff34dbdb7ba221e4203bb6551b80948dc71d.1698728953.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com
> > $ git am ./v2_20231031_gitgitgadget_sequencer_remove_use_of_hardcoded_comment_char.mbx
> >
> > $ git grep -c -e '".*#' -e "'#'" -- sequencer.c
> > sequencer.c:12
>
> As far as I can see those remaining instances are all to do with the '#'
> that separates a merge subject line from its parents. I don't think we
> need to complicate things anymore by respecting core.commentchar there
> as the '#' is not denoting a commented line, it is being used as an
> intra-line separator instead.

Ah, that might be jogging my memory slightly. I had a patch to put a comment before the one-line commit summaries in the TODO list (https://github.com/git/git/commit/f1ae608477e010b96557d6fc87eed9f3f39b905e). I think I at some point noticed comment_line_char, and went to switch to it, probably also switching the mid-line comment char for merges, and then noticed the potential for breakage due to the manual parsing of those.

Anyway, I trust your analysis, but I believe some of that analysis belongs in the relevant commit messages if we push forward with these changes.

Show 21 quoted lines
> > Granted, four of those lines are code comments, but that still leaves
> > 8 hard coded references to '#' in the code at the end (i.e. the
> > majority are still left), meaning your second patch doesn't do what
> > its subject line claims.
> >
> > And, most important of all is still the first patch.  As I stated
> > elsewhere in this thread (at
> > CABPp-BFY7m_g+sT131_Ubxqo5FsHGKOPMng7=90_0-+xCS9NEQ@mail.gmail.com):
> >
> > """
> > I think supporting comment_line_char for the TODO file provides no
> > value, and I think the easier fix would be undoing the uses of
> > comment_line_char relative to the TODO file (perhaps also leaving
> > in-code comments to the effect that comment_line_char just doesn't
> > apply to the TODO file).
>
> I agree that I don't see much point in respecting core.commentchar in
> the TODO file as unlike a commit message a legitimate non-commented line
> will never begin with '#'. Unfortunately I think we're committed to
> respecting it - see 180bad3d10f (rebase -i: respect core.commentchar,
> 2013-02-11)

Thanks for digging up the old commit and the explicit mention of the TODO file. Kind of disappointing. While I can't imagine anything that would actually break by reverting this, it's not worth it at this point.

Show 12 quoted lines
> > [...]
> > I feel quite differently about patches that make COMMIT_EDITMSG
> > handling use comment_line_char more consistently since that code
> > simply writes the file without re-parsing it; although fixing
> > everything would be best, even fixing some of them to use
> > comment_line_char would be welcome.  I think the first two hunks of
> > your second patch happen to fall into this category, so if those were
> > split out, then I'd say those are good partial solutions.
>
> I think splitting the changes so that we have one patch that fixes the
> TODO file generation and another that fixes the commit message
> generation for fixup commands would be best.
That would seem more logical to me.

← back to recent threads