From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_DKIM_INVALID, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB1041F42D for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:01:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751325AbeC0JBc (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2018 05:01:32 -0400 Received: from mail-qt0-f196.google.com ([209.85.216.196]:40547 "EHLO mail-qt0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751185AbeC0JBb (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2018 05:01:31 -0400 Received: by mail-qt0-f196.google.com with SMTP id g5so11788532qth.7 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 02:01:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=r0ZwnqjRZ9nGYBMSoZAhYz0Z80o89uTmDDm1q1+hxec=; b=Xzi0uq4eTnhdnNzh229Nf1iFlhN4We2jGVFt4AfmktFDhrS+ncKMl0mSrbatj/wo05 TAhr6+wsXmF8/0vqohuxRn3YF3NB38HvzijOMAQVg6rJvPtLCWfL+N4Qfek1t5xuFAcA E/wvz3RXmrjbTxtWgHQVA5Zj5pRCaUbwzKgVluR3rjR8jfNTVC8l+mH3p8T5PiFHZp4A XkQfFtG1B52CqO53yIL7WcZRPPOtii7C0aS0lI1VXHZ64P0VY32dOTBksce+a1l1SQ/f P1XXxnVoOZkP4eJiShKi7alZWrcVgc4jGsIyGnyhkVa02kZrB12D1eI9y6joE8ybL4QQ RxwA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=r0ZwnqjRZ9nGYBMSoZAhYz0Z80o89uTmDDm1q1+hxec=; b=l0ReTg4tqMsfuFvJvVOkw6Dv6P3nrBRWgvpc+JDy5BBME6e8uSkRjMHAA7d22ZxXlO MrBV0RsPV2rbJ2O38gTkOnF4FVyx4ycJEoGUXT3JPMNpxxhovMzqc0sg1qJjSEYlAsh9 JyAilH2HgjwNSbVSR44fv+gy6cyb+FXcHsUW9kXIiXacdTQFG4rsj6WmDk/V/Xl2K6iz Vk4h4/vn6C4cIVb2Ppsf3JQkQIngcsmAv7lzUrzfCftmRQU1160XKWehP8pBTgW+yrjN 7EIb0k1i1TmDg5bYDY18fe2dM+ph/j+3W4jt/a2mo5MUdF3+0K1eEqV5yjMlmcEPV3qV +B3Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7EsBU36xZOIwNNyQj6WObYmm7+BBHNtIXSY8X3BpU1uLRRFPBEY 2w289UJnzQ9xbWc+djUCBZdlLFNtKUsns5Mpcpk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELs7aA8mBpUpwkfgzOVpSN4xeQBPapd1Aao3XbrNdDpWo3L9NgSdRNydIUXtty8+iOOY5kKEkmFidWN0zHwBgMQ= X-Received: by 10.237.49.195 with SMTP id 61mr61161017qth.77.1522141287973; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 02:01:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.174.202 with HTTP; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 02:01:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180325134947.25828-5-t.gummerer@gmail.com> References: <20180317222219.4940-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com> <20180325134947.25828-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com> <20180325134947.25828-5-t.gummerer@gmail.com> From: Eric Sunshine Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 05:01:19 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: hpPFCRg555K_fwywk2jvjOmNNt0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/6] worktree: factor out dwim_branch function To: Thomas Gummerer Cc: Git List , =?UTF-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41jIER1eQ==?= , Junio C Hamano Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > Factor out a dwim_branch function, which takes care of the dwim'ery in > 'git worktree add '. It's not too much code currently, but we're > adding a new kind of dwim in a subsequent patch, at which point it makes > more sense to have it as a separate function. > [...] > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gummerer > --- > diff --git a/builtin/worktree.c b/builtin/worktree.c > @@ -417,16 +431,9 @@ static int add(int ac, const char **av, const char *prefix) > if (ac < 2 && !opts.new_branch && !opts.detach) { > - int n; > - const char *s = worktree_basename(path, &n); > - opts.new_branch = xstrndup(s, n); > - if (guess_remote) { > - struct object_id oid; > - const char *remote = > - unique_tracking_name(opts.new_branch, &oid); > - if (remote) > - branch = remote; > - } > + const char *dwim_branchname = dwim_branch(path, &opts); > + if (dwim_branchname) > + branch = dwim_branchname; I don't care strongly but the name 'dwim_branchname' is awfully long in a context where it's assigned the result of a call to dwim_branch(). In this tiny code block, a short and sweet name 's' would be easy to grok; there'd be no confusion. Anyhow, it's subjective and not at all worth a re-roll.