Re: [PATCH] commit: correct advice about aborting a cherry-pick

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 08:18:45AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

quoted

 	if (file_exists(git_path("MERGE_HEAD")))
 		whence = FROM_MERGE;
-	else if (file_exists(git_path("CHERRY_PICK_HEAD")))
+	else if (file_exists(git_path("CHERRY_PICK_HEAD"))) {
 		whence = FROM_CHERRY_PICK;
+		if (file_exists(git_path("sequencer")))
+			sequencer_in_use = 1;

Should this be

	sequencer_in_use = file_exists(...)

so readers do not have to wonder what the variable is initialized
to?

Yeah, I think that is a readability improvement. I suppose the use-site
could also just run "file_exists" itself, but I wanted to keep the
filesystem-reading "magic name" bits together.

I take that one back.  The use-site is sufficiently far from this
assignment that is protected with a cascading if that the reader
needs to be aware that sequencer_in_use is initialized to zero
anyway.  The code you posted is just as readable, if not more.

I had also originally considered adding new states to "whence" to cover
these cases (i.e., FROM_CHERRY_PICK_MULTI), but there are fallouts all
over the place for call sites that do not care whether we are in the
single- or multi-commit mode.

;-)