On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 1:55 AM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Duy Nguyen <pclo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>> worktree = xcalloc(1, sizeof(*worktree)); >>> worktree->path = strbuf_detach(&worktree_path, NULL); >>> @@ -101,7 +101,8 @@ static struct worktree *get_main_worktree(void) >> >> All the good stuff is outside context lines again.. Somewhere between >> here we call add_head_info() which calls resolve_ref_unsafe(), which >> always uses data from current repo, not the submodule we want it to >> look at. > > Unrelated side question: What would you think of "variable context line > configuration" ? e.g. you could configure it to include anything from > up that line > that is currently shown after the @@ which is the function signature line.
Hmm.. no idea. I once dreamt of writing "Diff-Options: -U10" in the commit message and let git-log and everybody use that option automatically, though. I guess it's unrelated to your question :D > As to the add_head_info/resolve_ref_unsafe what impact does that have? > It produces a wrong head info but AFAICT it will never die(), such that for > the > purposes of this series (which only wants to know if a submodule uses the > worktree feature) it should be fine. > > It is highly misleading though for others to build upon this. > So maybe I'll only add the functionality internally in worktree.c > and document why the values are wrong, and only expose the > "int submodule_uses_worktrees(const char *path)" ? Yeah for submodule use then it should be ok. But people may start using it for something else, not realizing that it does not work as expected. -- Duy
