Jens Lehmann <jens.lehm...@web.de> writes:
>> I wonder if we should barf loudly if there shouldn't be a submodule
>> at that path, i.e.
>>
>> if (!submodule)
>> die("there is no submodule defined for path '%s'"...);
>>
>> though.
>
> Not sure if you want to die() or just issue a warning(), but yes.
As long as the code after that point is prepared to see a NULL
submodule and still behaves sensibly, then I would of course prefer
not dying. Continuing with just a warning() may not be a safe thing
to do if we are not prepared to see a NULL submodule after that
point, though.
