Re: [PATCH v4] worktree: add: introduce --checkout option

[Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>]

[re-sending this to the list since it's relevant, and I somehow
accidentally dropped the list]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Ray Zhang <zhanglei002@gmail.com> wrote:
>> By adding this option which defaults to true, we can use the
>> corresponding --no-checkout to make some customizations before
>> the checkout, like sparse checkout, etc.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Ray Zhang <zhanglei002@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> Changes since last version of this patch[v3]:
>>         Documentation/git-worktree.txt: HEAD --> `<branch>`
>>         t/t2025-worktree-add.sh: fix style
>
> Thanks, this version addresses the minor issues raised with the previous one.
>
> One observation below...
>
>> diff --git a/builtin/worktree.c b/builtin/worktree.c
>> @@ -284,11 +285,13 @@ static int add_worktree(const char *path, const char *refname,
>>         if (ret)
>>                 goto done;
>>
>> -       cp.argv = NULL;
>> -       argv_array_clear(&cp.args);
>> -       argv_array_pushl(&cp.args, "reset", "--hard", NULL);
>> -       cp.env = child_env.argv;
>> -       ret = run_command(&cp);
>> +       if (opts->checkout) {
>> +               cp.argv = NULL;
>> +               argv_array_clear(&cp.args);
>> +               argv_array_pushl(&cp.args, "reset", "--hard", NULL);
>> +               cp.env = child_env.argv;
>> +               ret = run_command(&cp);
>> +       }
>>         if (!ret) {
>>                 is_junk = 0;
>>                 free(junk_work_tree);
>
> In the no-checkout case, this code effectively becomes:
>
>     ret = run_command("update-ref"/"symbolic-ref");
>     if (ret)
>         goto done;
>     ...
>     if (!ret)
>         ...free stuff...
>     done:
>         ...
>
> 'ret' does not change value, so it's a bit odd to have an 'if (ret)'
> conditional immediately followed by an 'if (!ret)'.
>
> It might be cleaner to re-organize the code slightly so that 'if
> (ret)' is used after all run_command()s, and then outdent the "...free
> stuff..." code, like this:
>
>     ret = run_command(...);
>     if (ret)
>         goto done;
>     if (checkout) {
>         ret = run_command(...)
>         if (ret)
>             goto done;
>     }
>     ...free stuff...
>     done:
>         ...
>
> This is a very minor issue, and I'm not even convinced that the code
> is any clearer this way, so it's not something which should hold up
> this patch. If you try it and find it nicer, then it could be done as
> a follow-on cleanup patch (or a preparatory cleanup patch if you want
> to re-roll, but that's probably not necessary).
>
> I should have mentioned this earlier since I specifically looked for
> it with a previous version of the patch, but unfortunately didn't
> quite spot it. This time I did spot it.