Stefan Beller <stefanbel...@googlemail.com> writes:
> On 08/06/2013 08:39 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Thanks. Queued this at the tip of 'pu'. There seem to be some
>> fallouts found in the test suite, though.
> Thanks. I am sorry for forgetting 'make test' before sending patches.
> And the test suite is correct.
> e35ea450 (branch, commit, name-rev: ease up boolean conditions)
> is faulty. In builtin/branch.c the variables 'delete' and 'rename'
> are not used as a true boolean but I assumed so.
> These are parsed in via OPT_BIT and depending if you pass -d or -D
> for deletion you have value 1 or 2 in delete.
Likewise for 'rename' that becomes 2 when -M is given.
> Hence this change is incorrect:
> - if (!!delete + !!rename + !!force_create + !!list + !!new_upstream +
> !!unset_upstream > 1)
> + if (delete + rename + force_create + list + unset_upstream +
> + !!new_upstream > 1)
As a follow-up to this series, we may want to think about the
following as well:
- OPT__VERBOSE() is defined in terms of OPT_BOOLEAN(). I think we
use it to represent increasing levels of verbosity, so we cannot
turn this into OPT_BOOL(). Its implementation has to become
- OPT__QUIET() is defined in terms of OPT_BOOLEAN(). I offhand do
not know if we have increasing levels of quietness. The users
need auditing before we can decide to turn this into either
OPT_COUNTUP() or OPT_BOOL().
- OPT__DRY_RUN() should probably become OPT_BOOL().
- OPT_FORCE(); do we have levels of forcefulness? If so
OPT_COUNTUP(), otherwise OPT_BOOL().
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html