Re: [PATCH 0/5] minor ref-filter error-reporting bug-fixes

[Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>]

On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 11:18:19AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> This series fixes a few small inconsistencies in the error-reporting
> from ref-filter's atom parsers. Mostly I noticed this while dealing with
> unused parameters in one of the parsers, which led to noticing a few
> other small bugs. And I hope the result is a little cleaner, as it
> should reduce the number of strings needing translation.
>
>   [1/5]: ref-filter: reject arguments to %(HEAD)
>   [2/5]: ref-filter: factor out "%(foo) does not take arguments" errors
>   [3/5]: ref-filter: factor out "unrecognized %(foo) arg" errors
>   [4/5]: ref-filter: truncate atom names in error messages
>   [5/5]: ref-filter: convert email atom parser to use err_bad_arg()

I gave this series a careful read and found it all very satisfying. The
implementation is straightforward and leaves us with several much
friendlier error messages in the ref-filter's atom parsing code.

I left one comment throughout, but it was clarified when I read through
the rest of the series. So this one looks ready to pick up to my eyes.

Thanks,
Taylor