Gabriel Souza Franco [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
quoted
struct object_id oid;
- if (!get_oid_hex(name, &oid) && name[GIT_SHA1_HEXSZ] == ' ')
- name += GIT_SHA1_HEXSZ + 1;
- else
+ if (get_oid_hex(name, &oid))
oidclr(&oid);
+ else if (name[GIT_SHA1_HEXSZ] == ' ')
+ name += GIT_SHA1_HEXSZ + 1;
This makes sense to me. I wonder if we should be more particular about
the pure-sha1 case consuming the whole string, though. E.g., if we get:
1234567890123456789012345678901234567890-bananas
that should probably not have sha1 1234...
I don't think it should ever really happen in practice, but it might be
worth noticing and complaining when name[GIT_SHA1_HEXSZ] is neither
space nor '\0'.
Right. What kind of complaining? Is doing oidclr(&oid) and letting it
fail elsewhere enough?
I think that is the most sensible. After all, the first get-oid-hex
expects to find a valid 40-hex object name at the beginning of line,
and oidclr() is the way for it to signal a broken input, which is
how the callers of this codepath expects errors to be caught.
Thanks.