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

From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] minor ref-filter error-reporting bug-fixes
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2022 15:05:58 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y5ospnLHWIKKXadV@nand.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y5n3S7cnD7s/AIRL@coredump.intra.peff.net>

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