From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
Cc: Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] rebase: simplify code related to imply_merge()
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 13:00:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqiler8cga.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2b296b75-3f8d-28a9-a3d8-8134450852da@dunelm.org.uk> (Phillip Wood's message of "Thu, 23 Mar 2023 19:40:17 +0000")
Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
> On 23/03/2023 16:22, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
>> The code's evolution left in some bits surrounding enum rebase_type that
>> don't really make sense any more. In particular, it makes no sense to
>> invoke imply_merge() if the type is already known not to be
>> REBASE_APPLY, and it makes no sense to assign the type after calling
>> imply_merge().
>
> These look sensible, did imply_merges() use to do something more which
> made these calls useful?
Good question.
>> @@ -1494,9 +1493,6 @@ int cmd_rebase(int argc, const char **argv,
>> const char *prefix)
>> }
>> }
>> - if (options.type == REBASE_MERGE)
>> - imply_merge(&options, "--merge");
This piece is reasonable, of course. We already know we are in
merge mode so there is nothing implied.
Before this hunk, there is a bit of code to react to
options.strategy given. The code complains if we are using the
apply backend, and sets the options.type to REBASE_MERGE, which is
suspiciously similar to what imply_merge() is doing. I wonder if
the code should be simplified to make a call to imply_merge() while
we are doing similar simplification like this patch does?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-23 20:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-23 16:22 [PATCH 0/8] sequencer refactoring Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 16:22 ` [PATCH 1/8] rebase: simplify code related to imply_merge() Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 19:40 ` Phillip Wood
2023-03-23 20:00 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2023-03-23 21:08 ` Felipe Contreras
2023-08-09 17:15 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] rebase refactoring Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-09 17:15 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] rebase: simplify code related to imply_merge() Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-09 17:15 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] rebase: handle --strategy via imply_merge() as well Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-09 17:15 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] rebase: move parse_opt_keep_empty() down Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-08-15 14:01 ` Phillip Wood
2023-10-20 9:36 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] rebase refactoring Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-10-20 9:36 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] rebase: simplify code related to imply_merge() Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-10-20 9:36 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] rebase: handle --strategy via imply_merge() as well Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-10-20 21:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-10-20 9:36 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] rebase: move parse_opt_keep_empty() down Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-10-20 22:07 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] rebase refactoring Junio C Hamano
2023-10-23 15:43 ` Phillip Wood
2023-10-23 19:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-03-23 16:22 ` [PATCH 2/8] rebase: move parse_opt_keep_empty() down Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 19:39 ` Phillip Wood
2023-03-23 16:22 ` [PATCH 3/8] sequencer: pass around rebase action explicitly Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 19:27 ` Phillip Wood
2023-03-23 21:27 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 16:22 ` [PATCH 4/8] sequencer: create enum for edit_todo_list() return value Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 19:27 ` Phillip Wood
2023-03-23 16:22 ` [PATCH 5/8] rebase: preserve interactive todo file on checkout failure Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 19:31 ` Phillip Wood
2023-03-23 22:38 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-24 14:15 ` Phillip Wood
2023-03-24 14:42 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 20:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-03-23 23:23 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-24 4:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-03-23 16:22 ` [PATCH 6/8] sequencer: simplify allocation of result array in todo_list_rearrange_squash() Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 19:46 ` Phillip Wood
2023-03-23 22:13 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 16:22 ` [PATCH 7/8] sequencer: pass `onto` to complete_action() as object-id Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 19:34 ` Phillip Wood
2023-03-23 21:36 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-24 14:18 ` Phillip Wood
2023-03-23 16:22 ` [PATCH 8/8] rebase: improve resumption from incorrect initial todo list Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-26 14:28 ` Phillip Wood
2023-04-26 15:34 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-05-17 12:13 ` Phillip Wood
2023-08-24 16:46 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-03-23 19:38 ` [PATCH 0/8] sequencer refactoring Phillip Wood
2023-03-25 11:08 ` Phillip Wood
2023-04-06 12:09 ` Phillip Wood
2023-05-17 13:10 ` Phillip Wood
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqiler8cga.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de \
--cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).