* [PATCH] rebase -i: fix numbering in squash message @ 2018-08-15 9:41 Phillip Wood 2018-08-15 18:05 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Phillip Wood @ 2018-08-15 9:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Git Mailing List, Junio C Hamano, Johannes Schindelin; +Cc: Phillip Wood From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> Commit e12a7ef597 ("rebase -i: Handle "combination of <n> commits" with GETTEXT_POISON", 2018-04-27) changed the way that individual commit messages are labelled when squashing commits together. In doing so a regression was introduced where the numbering of the messages is off by one. This commit fixes that and adds a test for the numbering. Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> --- sequencer.c | 4 ++-- t/t3418-rebase-continue.sh | 4 +++- 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c index 2eb5ec7227..77d3c2346f 100644 --- a/sequencer.c +++ b/sequencer.c @@ -1387,13 +1387,13 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, unlink(rebase_path_fixup_msg()); strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); strbuf_addf(&buf, _("This is the commit message #%d:"), - ++opts->current_fixup_count); + ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); strbuf_addstr(&buf, body); } else if (command == TODO_FIXUP) { strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); strbuf_addf(&buf, _("The commit message #%d will be skipped:"), - ++opts->current_fixup_count); + ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); strbuf_add_commented_lines(&buf, body, strlen(body)); } else diff --git a/t/t3418-rebase-continue.sh b/t/t3418-rebase-continue.sh index e9fd029160..ee871dd1bb 100755 --- a/t/t3418-rebase-continue.sh +++ b/t/t3418-rebase-continue.sh @@ -128,13 +128,15 @@ test_expect_success '--skip after failed fixup cleans commit message' ' : The first squash was skipped, therefore: && git show HEAD >out && test_i18ngrep "# This is a combination of 2 commits" out && + test_i18ngrep "# This is the commit message #2:" out && (test_set_editor "$PWD/copy-editor.sh" && git rebase --skip) && git show HEAD >out && test_i18ngrep ! "# This is a combination" out && : Final squash failed, but there was still a squash && - test_i18ngrep "# This is a combination of 2 commits" .git/copy.txt + test_i18ngrep "# This is a combination of 2 commits" .git/copy.txt && + test_i18ngrep "# This is the commit message #2:" .git/copy.txt ' test_expect_success 'setup rerere database' ' -- 2.18.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] rebase -i: fix numbering in squash message 2018-08-15 9:41 [PATCH] rebase -i: fix numbering in squash message Phillip Wood @ 2018-08-15 18:05 ` Junio C Hamano 2018-08-15 18:33 ` Phillip Wood 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2018-08-15 18:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Phillip Wood; +Cc: Git Mailing List, Johannes Schindelin, Phillip Wood Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@talktalk.net> writes: > From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> > > Commit e12a7ef597 ("rebase -i: Handle "combination of <n> commits" with > GETTEXT_POISON", 2018-04-27) changed the way that individual commit > messages are labelled when squashing commits together. In doing so a > regression was introduced where the numbering of the messages is off by > one. This commit fixes that and adds a test for the numbering. > > Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> > --- > sequencer.c | 4 ++-- > t/t3418-rebase-continue.sh | 4 +++- > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c > index 2eb5ec7227..77d3c2346f 100644 > --- a/sequencer.c > +++ b/sequencer.c > @@ -1387,13 +1387,13 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, > unlink(rebase_path_fixup_msg()); > strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); > strbuf_addf(&buf, _("This is the commit message #%d:"), > - ++opts->current_fixup_count); > + ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); > strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); > strbuf_addstr(&buf, body); > } else if (command == TODO_FIXUP) { > strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); > strbuf_addf(&buf, _("The commit message #%d will be skipped:"), > - ++opts->current_fixup_count); > + ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); > strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); > strbuf_add_commented_lines(&buf, body, strlen(body)); > } else Good spotting. When viewed in a wider context (e.g. "git show -W" after applying this patch), the way opts->current_fixup_count is used is somewhat incoherent and adding 1 to pre-increment would make it even more painful to read. Given that there already is strbuf_addf(&header, _("This is a combination of %d commits."), opts->current_fixup_count + 2); before this part, the code should make it clear these three places refer to the same number for it to be readable. I wonder if it makes it easier to read, understand and maintain if there were a local variable that gets opts->current_fixup_count+2 at the beginning of the function, make these three places refer to that variable, and move the increment of opts->current_fixup_count down in the function, after the "if we are squashing, do this, if we are fixing up, do that, otherwise, we do not know what we are doing" cascade. And use the more common post-increment, as we no longer depend on the returned value while at it. IOW, something like this (untested), on top of yours. sequencer.c | 10 ++++++---- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c index 77d3c2346f..f82c283a89 100644 --- a/sequencer.c +++ b/sequencer.c @@ -1331,8 +1331,9 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT; int res; const char *message, *body; + int fixup_count = opts->current_fixup_count + 2; - if (opts->current_fixup_count > 0) { + if (fixup_count > 2) { struct strbuf header = STRBUF_INIT; char *eol; @@ -1345,7 +1346,7 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, strbuf_addf(&header, "%c ", comment_line_char); strbuf_addf(&header, _("This is a combination of %d commits."), - opts->current_fixup_count + 2); + fixup_count); strbuf_splice(&buf, 0, eol - buf.buf, header.buf, header.len); strbuf_release(&header); } else { @@ -1387,18 +1388,19 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, unlink(rebase_path_fixup_msg()); strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); strbuf_addf(&buf, _("This is the commit message #%d:"), - ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); + fixup_count); strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); strbuf_addstr(&buf, body); } else if (command == TODO_FIXUP) { strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); strbuf_addf(&buf, _("The commit message #%d will be skipped:"), - ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); + fixup_count); strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); strbuf_add_commented_lines(&buf, body, strlen(body)); } else return error(_("unknown command: %d"), command); unuse_commit_buffer(commit, message); + opts->current_fixup_count++; res = write_message(buf.buf, buf.len, rebase_path_squash_msg(), 0); strbuf_release(&buf); ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] rebase -i: fix numbering in squash message 2018-08-15 18:05 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2018-08-15 18:33 ` Phillip Wood 2018-08-15 19:17 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Phillip Wood @ 2018-08-15 18:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Git Mailing List, Johannes Schindelin, Phillip Wood Hi Junio On 15/08/2018 19:05, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@talktalk.net> writes: > >> From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> >> >> Commit e12a7ef597 ("rebase -i: Handle "combination of <n> commits" with >> GETTEXT_POISON", 2018-04-27) changed the way that individual commit >> messages are labelled when squashing commits together. In doing so a >> regression was introduced where the numbering of the messages is off by >> one. This commit fixes that and adds a test for the numbering. >> >> Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk> >> --- >> sequencer.c | 4 ++-- >> t/t3418-rebase-continue.sh | 4 +++- >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c >> index 2eb5ec7227..77d3c2346f 100644 >> --- a/sequencer.c >> +++ b/sequencer.c >> @@ -1387,13 +1387,13 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, >> unlink(rebase_path_fixup_msg()); >> strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); >> strbuf_addf(&buf, _("This is the commit message #%d:"), >> - ++opts->current_fixup_count); >> + ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); >> strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); >> strbuf_addstr(&buf, body); >> } else if (command == TODO_FIXUP) { >> strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); >> strbuf_addf(&buf, _("The commit message #%d will be skipped:"), >> - ++opts->current_fixup_count); >> + ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); >> strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); >> strbuf_add_commented_lines(&buf, body, strlen(body)); >> } else > > Good spotting. When viewed in a wider context (e.g. "git show -W" > after applying this patch), the way opts->current_fixup_count is > used is somewhat incoherent and adding 1 to pre-increment would make > it even more painful to read. Given that there already is > > strbuf_addf(&header, _("This is a combination of %d commits."), > opts->current_fixup_count + 2); > > before this part, the code should make it clear these three places > refer to the same number for it to be readable. > > I wonder if it makes it easier to read, understand and maintain if > there were a local variable that gets opts->current_fixup_count+2 at > the beginning of the function, make these three places refer to that > variable, and move the increment of opts->current_fixup_count down > in the function, after the "if we are squashing, do this, if we are > fixing up, do that, otherwise, we do not know what we are doing" > cascade. And use the more common post-increment, as we no longer > depend on the returned value while at it. > > IOW, something like this (untested), on top of yours. I think you'd need to change commit_staged_changes() as well as it relies on the current_fixup_count counting the number of fixups, not the number of fixups plus two. Having said that using 'current_fixup_count + 2' to create the labels and incrementing the count at the end of update_squash_messages() would probably be clearer than my version. I'm about to go away so it'll probably be the second week of September before I can re-roll this, will that be too late for getting it into 2.19? Best Wishes Phillip > > sequencer.c | 10 ++++++---- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c > index 77d3c2346f..f82c283a89 100644 > --- a/sequencer.c > +++ b/sequencer.c > @@ -1331,8 +1331,9 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, > struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT; > int res; > const char *message, *body; > + int fixup_count = opts->current_fixup_count + 2; > > - if (opts->current_fixup_count > 0) { > + if (fixup_count > 2) { > struct strbuf header = STRBUF_INIT; > char *eol; > > @@ -1345,7 +1346,7 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, > > strbuf_addf(&header, "%c ", comment_line_char); > strbuf_addf(&header, _("This is a combination of %d commits."), > - opts->current_fixup_count + 2); > + fixup_count); > strbuf_splice(&buf, 0, eol - buf.buf, header.buf, header.len); > strbuf_release(&header); > } else { > @@ -1387,18 +1388,19 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, > unlink(rebase_path_fixup_msg()); > strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); > strbuf_addf(&buf, _("This is the commit message #%d:"), > - ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); > + fixup_count); > strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); > strbuf_addstr(&buf, body); > } else if (command == TODO_FIXUP) { > strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); > strbuf_addf(&buf, _("The commit message #%d will be skipped:"), > - ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); > + fixup_count); > strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); > strbuf_add_commented_lines(&buf, body, strlen(body)); > } else > return error(_("unknown command: %d"), command); > unuse_commit_buffer(commit, message); > + opts->current_fixup_count++; > > res = write_message(buf.buf, buf.len, rebase_path_squash_msg(), 0); > strbuf_release(&buf); > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] rebase -i: fix numbering in squash message 2018-08-15 18:33 ` Phillip Wood @ 2018-08-15 19:17 ` Junio C Hamano 2018-08-16 8:42 ` Johannes Schindelin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2018-08-15 19:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Phillip Wood; +Cc: Git Mailing List, Johannes Schindelin, Phillip Wood Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@talktalk.net> writes: >> I wonder if it makes it easier to read, understand and maintain if >> there were a local variable that gets opts->current_fixup_count+2 at >> the beginning of the function, make these three places refer to that >> variable, and move the increment of opts->current_fixup_count down >> in the function, after the "if we are squashing, do this, if we are >> fixing up, do that, otherwise, we do not know what we are doing" >> cascade. And use the more common post-increment, as we no longer >> depend on the returned value while at it. >> >> IOW, something like this (untested), on top of yours. > > I think you'd need to change commit_staged_changes() as well as it > relies on the current_fixup_count counting the number of fixups, not the > number of fixups plus two. I suspect you misread what I wrote (see below for the patch). The fixup_count is a new local variable in update_squash_messages() that holds N+2; in other words, I am not suggesting to change what opts->current_fixup_count means. > Having said that using 'current_fixup_count + > 2' to create the labels and incrementing the count at the end of > update_squash_messages() would probably be clearer than my version. I'm > about to go away so it'll probably be the second week of September > before I can re-roll this, will that be too late for getting it into 2.19? I actually do not mind to go with what you originally sent, unless a cleaned up version is vastly more readable. After all, a clean-up can be done separately and safely. Thanks. >> sequencer.c | 10 ++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c >> index 77d3c2346f..f82c283a89 100644 >> --- a/sequencer.c >> +++ b/sequencer.c >> @@ -1331,8 +1331,9 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, >> struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT; >> int res; >> const char *message, *body; >> + int fixup_count = opts->current_fixup_count + 2; >> >> - if (opts->current_fixup_count > 0) { >> + if (fixup_count > 2) { >> struct strbuf header = STRBUF_INIT; >> char *eol; >> >> @@ -1345,7 +1346,7 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, >> >> strbuf_addf(&header, "%c ", comment_line_char); >> strbuf_addf(&header, _("This is a combination of %d commits."), >> - opts->current_fixup_count + 2); >> + fixup_count); >> strbuf_splice(&buf, 0, eol - buf.buf, header.buf, header.len); >> strbuf_release(&header); >> } else { >> @@ -1387,18 +1388,19 @@ static int update_squash_messages(enum todo_command command, >> unlink(rebase_path_fixup_msg()); >> strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); >> strbuf_addf(&buf, _("This is the commit message #%d:"), >> - ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); >> + fixup_count); >> strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); >> strbuf_addstr(&buf, body); >> } else if (command == TODO_FIXUP) { >> strbuf_addf(&buf, "\n%c ", comment_line_char); >> strbuf_addf(&buf, _("The commit message #%d will be skipped:"), >> - ++opts->current_fixup_count + 1); >> + fixup_count); >> strbuf_addstr(&buf, "\n\n"); >> strbuf_add_commented_lines(&buf, body, strlen(body)); >> } else >> return error(_("unknown command: %d"), command); >> unuse_commit_buffer(commit, message); >> + opts->current_fixup_count++; >> >> res = write_message(buf.buf, buf.len, rebase_path_squash_msg(), 0); >> strbuf_release(&buf); >> >> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] rebase -i: fix numbering in squash message 2018-08-15 19:17 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2018-08-16 8:42 ` Johannes Schindelin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Johannes Schindelin @ 2018-08-16 8:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Phillip Wood, Git Mailing List, Phillip Wood Hi, On Wed, 15 Aug 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@talktalk.net> writes: > > >> I wonder if it makes it easier to read, understand and maintain if > >> there were a local variable that gets opts->current_fixup_count+2 at > >> the beginning of the function, make these three places refer to that > >> variable, and move the increment of opts->current_fixup_count down > >> in the function, after the "if we are squashing, do this, if we are > >> fixing up, do that, otherwise, we do not know what we are doing" > >> cascade. And use the more common post-increment, as we no longer > >> depend on the returned value while at it. > >> > >> IOW, something like this (untested), on top of yours. > > > > I think you'd need to change commit_staged_changes() as well as it > > relies on the current_fixup_count counting the number of fixups, not the > > number of fixups plus two. > > I suspect you misread what I wrote (see below for the patch). I had the same reaction as Phillip: is your patch good enough, or does it only touch one part, but not other that may need the same "touch-upping". > The fixup_count is a new local variable in update_squash_messages() > that holds N+2; in other words, I am not suggesting to change what > opts->current_fixup_count means. Sure, and the better cleanup could possibly be to change the meaning of opts->current_fixup_count altogether. > > Having said that using 'current_fixup_count + > > 2' to create the labels and incrementing the count at the end of > > update_squash_messages() would probably be clearer than my version. I'm > > about to go away so it'll probably be the second week of September > > before I can re-roll this, will that be too late for getting it into 2.19? > > I actually do not mind to go with what you originally sent, unless a > cleaned up version is vastly more readable. After all, a clean-up > can be done separately and safely. At this point, I think Phillip's version would be safer, as it would make it easier to do a more complete cleanup without the pressure of having to fix a bug in one big hurry. So: ACK on Phillip's patch from me. Ciao, Dscho ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-08-16 8:42 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2018-08-15 9:41 [PATCH] rebase -i: fix numbering in squash message Phillip Wood 2018-08-15 18:05 ` Junio C Hamano 2018-08-15 18:33 ` Phillip Wood 2018-08-15 19:17 ` Junio C Hamano 2018-08-16 8:42 ` Johannes Schindelin
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).