Re: [PATCH] remote.c: use shorten_unambiguous_ref

[Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@googlemail.com>]

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 18:55, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
>> Hmm. I was thinking we might be able to just do away with prettify_ref,
>> but I didn't consider the fact that we need to prettify remote things. I
>> think you could still unambiguously prettify the local half of those
>> callsites, though.
>>
>> Given that the two functions are closely related, should we perhaps
>> rename them to
>>
>>   const char *shorten_ref(const char *);
>>   const char *shorten_ref_unambiguous(const char *);
>>
>> ? The implementations are quite different, with prettify_ref not really
>> respecting the ref lookup rules, but rather just considering a few
>> pre-determined bits of the hierarchy as uninteresting. It shouldn't be
>> that hard to have them both use the same implementation, like:
>>
>>   const char *shorten_ref(const char *, int unambiguous);
>
> I was hoping that a single "shorten" function that does not even take
> "unambiguous" parameter would be used by almost everybody.  As far as I
> can see, Bert's "rev-parse --abbrev-ref" RFC is the only caller that might
> need to use a value different from warn_ambiguous_refs, and all the other
> existing callers (including fill_tracking_info() for "upstream" report by
> git-branch) do not have to pass "0" but can use the default.  IOW, we can
> have:
>
>        const char *shorten_ref_unambiguous(const char *ref, int strict);
>        const char *shorten_ref(const char *ref)
>        {
>                return shorten_ref_unambiguous(ref, warn_ambiguous_refs);
>        }
There's too much confusion: Whatever input you gave to
shorten_unambiguous_ref(), if you pass the result to dwim_ref() you
get the input again. That is, all return values are unambiguous. The
only small different (and here comes a little word-confusion) is, that
in strict mode you wont get any warning for 'ambiguous' refs. So the
names "shorten_ref_unambiguous" and "shorten_rer" are misleading,
because it looks like the former returns unambiguous refs and the
latter not. Which is wrong.

I can't think about this further, no time sorry.

Bert