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=-2.8 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 316AB1F404 for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2018 20:33:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752829AbeCOUdV (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Mar 2018 16:33:21 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com ([74.125.82.51]:34866 "EHLO mail-wm0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752693AbeCOUdU (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Mar 2018 16:33:20 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id x7so12917951wmc.0 for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:33:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=8RYzQKFbx8YvZ6N8aFO3+lorjfBUo/X+496YS3Q4pso=; b=h6ni+RmD9V9FPA5s52Lvsb7VaIH+DjprIES/Y5PKwHCM9sam3OGwXclup/sa1aHzs1 oqaqKdt4E167bNCf1lRed8jpcw9SI466JV8mU2AqiVkrkSkXVFv5edz2HoP/NQQrvDrk c1qf0KQ1NPOyqASIPOCzseuBf1Pccd+YpzqhOsGtlnz9QlGfelxUo67sMEGlfxm5lQVT OgEI2thdZx/KQTfDdVUxwdJFjCE/bVdHNcdk0Nq4nyrW5Y14R9HW/VtIf4YuikuWVRqN RdqXtoTutGrXzQ2FPvcI/Ougr1MKld3wlunbKapgNRmPzyo5N8tQoGtrlrwM/PEJ2jKi 54oQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=8RYzQKFbx8YvZ6N8aFO3+lorjfBUo/X+496YS3Q4pso=; b=Zk01hn12YZBlwlooy6iqoi8nnipRxb52DN3gAtHT6w4cT7bxWJtbsI3KWn3doLoFov 8vx0YDg4gEPmn48FtlPWcI3zSToa+hLciqOR6oG/6YcCOFdgGVmV916ltQ98tGFLdzZE /NlEw6ClrJ4jRKxeJt+XcJYYQ2sq96AxsixKlU8l3wyE7NmGFGfRK0zWNI9jmvIvHP7k naN1FmblkOPJ2aF/FxxwWe51aqgQ84V9AA0IM5MNllOjTOfI9ThF8t5ppgh88CT7FvH/ 8ioWSCDzwRqIblyZAXXTCmN8uybS9M8nZEG6qcfSxVPuGwdfBIk1gMSg2dR7OiqBFlEX 6S7w== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7FdDhxjE1B3Fd6UEbV7s/t4t+QefctB+FYsBl/vRy74BnM/LAEk 205UST/OT5dYY1wy2FPCKWw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELuj5Y8vqw9X/BS8fjkip+fJPXIEFuBWD+kGnLik2E86S6TMT9qC025blAIaTAGSkQ3fs1zGhA== X-Received: by 10.28.169.150 with SMTP id s144mr267899wme.40.1521145998502; Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:33:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (112.68.155.104.bc.googleusercontent.com. [104.155.68.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y75sm5086193wme.13.2018.03.15.13.33.17 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:33:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Kaartic Sivaraam Cc: Git mailing list , Eric Sunshine Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] builtin/branch: give more useful error messages when renaming References: <20171102065407.25404-1-kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com> <20180310155416.21802-1-kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com> <20180310155416.21802-3-kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:33:17 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20180310155416.21802-3-kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com> (Kaartic Sivaraam's message of "Sat, 10 Mar 2018 21:24:15 +0530") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Kaartic Sivaraam writes: > +static void get_error_msg(struct strbuf* error_msg, > + const char* oldname, enum old_branch_validation_result old_branch_name_res, > + const char* newname, enum branch_validation_result new_branch_name_res) > +{ > + const char* connector_string = "; "; > + unsigned append_connector = 0; > + > + switch (old_branch_name_res) { > + case VALIDATION_1_FATAL_INVALID_OLD_BRANCH_NAME: > + strbuf_addf(error_msg, > + _("old branch name '%s' is invalid"), oldname); > + append_connector = 1; > + break; > + case VALIDATION_1_FATAL_OLD_BRANCH_DOESNT_EXIST: > + strbuf_addf(error_msg, > + _("branch '%s' doesn't exist"), oldname); > + append_connector = 1; > + break; > + > + /* not necessary to handle nonfatal cases */ > + case VALIDATION_1_PASS_OLD_BRANCH_EXISTS: > + case VALIDATION_1_WARN_BAD_OLD_BRANCH_NAME: > + break; > + } > + > + switch (new_branch_name_res) { > + case VALIDATION_FATAL_BRANCH_EXISTS_NO_FORCE: > + strbuf_addf(error_msg, "%s", > + (append_connector) ? connector_string : ""); > + strbuf_addf(error_msg, > + _("branch '%s' already exists"), newname); > + break; > + case VALIDATION_FATAL_CANNOT_FORCE_UPDATE_CURRENT_BRANCH: > + strbuf_addf(error_msg, "%s", > + (append_connector) ? connector_string : ""); > + strbuf_addstr(error_msg, > + _("cannot force update the current branch")); > + break; > + case VALIDATION_FATAL_INVALID_BRANCH_NAME: > + strbuf_addf(error_msg, "%s", > + (append_connector) ? connector_string : ""); > + strbuf_addf(error_msg, > + _("new branch name '%s' is invalid"), newname); > + break; > + > + /* not necessary to handle nonfatal cases */ > + case VALIDATION_PASS_BRANCH_DOESNT_EXIST: > + case VALIDATION_PASS_BRANCH_EXISTS: > + case VALIDATION_WARN_BRANCH_EXISTS: > + break; > + } > +} Quite honestly, I am not sure if this amount of new code that results in sentence lego is really worth it. Is it so wrong for "branch -m tset master" to complain that master already exists so no branch can be renamed to it?