On Fri, Feb 18 2022, Taylor Blau wrote:

On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 08:10:07PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

quoted

quoted

+int reflog_delete(const char *rev, int flags, int verbose)
+{
+	struct cmd_reflog_expire_cb cmd = { 0 };
+	int status = 0;
+	reflog_expiry_should_prune_fn *should_prune_fn = should_expire_reflog_ent;
+	const char *spec = strstr(rev, "@{");
+	char *ep, *ref;
+	int recno;
+	struct expire_reflog_policy_cb cb = {
+		.dry_run = !!(flags & EXPIRE_REFLOGS_DRY_RUN),
+	};
+
+	if (verbose)
+		should_prune_fn = should_expire_reflog_ent_verbose;
+
+	if (!spec) {
+		status |= error(_("not a reflog: %s"), rev);
+	}
+
+	if (!dwim_log(rev, spec - rev, NULL, &ref)) {
+		status |= error(_("no reflog for '%s'"), rev);
+	}

For these let's follow our usual style of not having braces for
single-line if's.

Buuuut in this case doing so will make the diff move detection less
useful for 1..2.

So probably best to leave it, or do some post-cleanup at the end maybe.

Hmm. I don't think the diff detection mechanism would have an
opportunity to kick in here, since the code is added in one patch and
then removed in another. I think I may be missing what you're trying to
say here ;).

In any case, I don't think it's a huge deal if we can't accurately
colorize this with `--color-moved`, so I'd probably just as soon clean
up the style nits in this patch.

Yes, this should really be read in combination with my comment on 2/3 to
squash that commit into 1/3 to take full advantage of that, sorry.