From: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
To: shawn wilson <ag4ve.us@gmail.com>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v1.8.3-rc0
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 07:32:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <517B62D8.5020006@alum.mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAH_OBievcf-_z_AX9UrmWL_HVFT2vSQTu+wXAjAFeQBM8iFSGw@mail.gmail.com>
On 04/27/2013 04:24 AM, shawn wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> * There was no good way to ask "I have a random string that came from
>> outside world. I want to turn it into a 40-hex object name while
>> making sure such an object exists". A new peeling suffix ^{object}
>> can be used for that purpose, together with "rev-parse --verify".
>>
>
> What does this mean / what is the reason behind this? I can only think
> it might be useful in a test suite to make sure git isn't doing
> anything stupid with hashes...?
The topic is discussed here:
http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/Bug-in-quot-git-rev-parse-verify-quot-td7580929.html
As discussed in the thread, when verifying that an argument names an
existing object, it is usually also appropriate to verify that the named
object is of a particular type (or can be converted to a particular
type), which could already be done with syntax like
"$userstring^{commit}". But if, for example, you want to avoid
unwrapping tags but also want to verify that the named object really
exists, "$userstring^{object}" now provides a way.
And what do you have against test suites? :-)
Michael
--
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@alum.mit.edu
http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-27 5:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-27 0:22 [ANNOUNCE] Git v1.8.3-rc0 Junio C Hamano
2013-04-27 2:24 ` shawn wilson
2013-04-27 5:32 ` Michael Haggerty [this message]
2013-04-28 21:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-27 9:18 ` John Keeping
2013-04-29 3:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-29 19:15 ` [PATCH] Fix grammar in the 1.8.3 release notes Marc Branchaud
2013-04-29 21:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-29 21:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-30 14:28 ` Marc Branchaud
2013-05-01 8:24 ` Lukas Fleischer
2013-05-01 14:06 ` Marc Branchaud
2013-05-01 17:55 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-29 21:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-30 3:09 ` Eric Sunshine
2013-04-30 15:12 ` Phil Hord
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=517B62D8.5020006@alum.mit.edu \
--to=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=ag4ve.us@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).