Re: [PATCH] branch: let '--edit-description' default to rebased branch during rebase

["Marc-André Lureau" <marcandre.lureau@gmail.com>]

Hi

On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 5:28 PM Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 7:36 AM <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Defaulting to editing the description of the rebased branch without an
> > explicit branchname argument would be useful.  Even the git bash prompt
> > shows the name of the rebased branch, and then
> >
> >   ~/src/git (mybranch|REBASE-i 1/2)$ git branch --edit-description
> >   fatal: Cannot give description to detached HEAD
> >
> > looks quite unhelpful.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > diff --git a/builtin/branch.c b/builtin/branch.c
> > @@ -745,15 +745,27 @@ int cmd_branch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> >                 if (!argc) {
> > -                       if (filter.detached)
> > -                               die(_("Cannot give description to detached HEAD"));
> > -                       branch_name = head;
> > +                       if (filter.detached) {
> > +                               struct wt_status_state state;
> > +
> > +                               memset(&state, 0, sizeof(state));
> > +
> > +                               if (wt_status_check_rebase(NULL, &state)) {
> > +                                       branch_name = state.branch;
> > +                               }
>
> Style: drop unneeded braces.

ok

>
> > +
> > +                               if (!branch_name)
> > +                                       die(_("Cannot give description to detached HEAD"));
> > +
> > +                               free(state.onto);
>
> Also, no need for all the blank lines which eat up valuable vertical
> screen real-estate without making the code clearer.

ok

>
> > +                       } else
> > +                               branch_name = xstrdup(head);
>
> It would be easier to see what happens in the common case (when not
> rebasing) if you invert the condition to `if (!filter.detached)` and
> turn this one-line 'else' branch into the 'if' branch.

indeed

>
> > @@ -772,6 +784,8 @@ int cmd_branch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> >                 if (edit_branch_description(branch_name))
> >                         return 1;
> > +
> > +               free(branch_name);
>
> That `return 1` just above this free() is leaking 'branch_name', isn't it?

right, let's fix that too

>
> > diff --git a/t/t3200-branch.sh b/t/t3200-branch.sh
> > @@ -1260,6 +1260,25 @@ test_expect_success 'use --edit-description' '
> > +test_expect_success 'use --edit-description during rebase' '
> > +       write_script editor <<-\EOF &&
> > +               echo "Rebase contents" >"$1"
> > +       EOF
> > +       (
> > +               set_fake_editor &&
> > +               FAKE_LINES="break 1" git rebase -i HEAD^ &&
> > +               EDITOR=./editor git branch --edit-description &&
> > +               git rebase --continue
> > +       ) &&
> > +       write_script editor <<-\EOF &&
> > +               git stripspace -s <"$1" >"EDITOR_OUTPUT"
> > +       EOF
> > +       EDITOR=./editor git branch --edit-description &&
> > +       echo "Rebase contents" >expect &&
> > +       test_cmp expect EDITOR_OUTPUT
> > +'
> > +test_done
>
> Strange place for a test_done() invocation considering that existing
> tests follow the new one added by this patch.

doh, sorry
thanks for the review!

>
> >  test_expect_success 'detect typo in branch name when using --edit-description' '
> >         write_script editor <<-\EOF &&
> >                 echo "New contents" >"$1"



-- 
Marc-André Lureau