From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C57FB1F990 for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 21:51:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726073AbgHFVv2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2020 17:51:28 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33472 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725927AbgHFVv1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2020 17:51:27 -0400 Received: from out0.migadu.com (out0.migadu.com [IPv6:2001:41d0:2:267::]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC2D0C061574 for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 14:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ameretat.dev; s=default; t=1596750684; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to; bh=qTjdz8TATfkeyewLAan4MbkXzZ1ktKBZpqJfBzd4zdU=; b=h8mrtd5a9F+iPfo10Em8wIaDGoC+POaP9HUlVk58oi2XHuNDAUlHqVTZ+vC1dbB4E6lyo6 8hc8RFGH7/19u6DTEurGZ1VaT8VQ2h8ECxA9VNlLcPibjP6VzcwbR5SAf97sjBXPC/8bDf whYPRxMp3B3G5neGNXwk8kC3qtFUrG0= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] apply: make i-t-a entries never match worktree X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: "Raymond E. Pasco" To: "Junio C Hamano" Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2020 17:47:04 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu Aug 6, 2020 at 5:00 PM EDT, Junio C Hamano wrote: > At first glance, it feels somewhat sad that this check is not done > in check_preimage(); after all, the caller of check_preimage() feeds > it to all kind of patches, without excluding path creation, so the > helper should be allowed to say "heh, you are trying to create path > F with this patch, but there already is F in the index", "you are > renaming into F but there is F already", etc. I spent some time trying to put it in there before deciding it was better off in check_to_create(). > It is somewhat unsatisfactory that we need to do the same > index_name_pos probing twice. I wonder if we somehow can > consolidate them? > > Perhaps something along this line, instead of this patch? I think this logic can be consolidated and still readable, yeah. I'll send a patch.