Sonny Michaud <michaud.so...@gmail.com> writes:

> diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c                                        
>  
> index 77c27c511..651bb01f0 100644                                             
>  
> --- a/wt-status.c                                                             
>  
> +++ b/wt-status.c                                                             
>  
> @@ -1827,6 +1827,15 @@ static void wt_shortstatus_print_tracking(struct 
> wt_status *s)                                                                 
>          
>         fputc(s->null_termination ? '\0' : '\n', s->fp);                      
>  
>  }                                                                            
>  
>                                                                               
>  
> +static void wt_shortstatus_print_stash_summary(struct wt_status *s)          
>  
> +{                                                                            
>  
> +       int stash_count = 0;                                                  
>  
> +                                                                             
>  
> +       for_each_reflog_ent("refs/stash", stash_count_refs, &stash_count);    
>  

A singleton instance of this in wt_longstatus_print_stash_summary()
thing was OK, but let's not duplicate and spread the badness.  Have
a simple there-liner helper function "static int stash_count(void);"
that does the above and returns the stash_count, and use it from
both places.

> +       if (stash_count > 0)                                                  
>  
> +    color_fprintf(s->fp, color(WT_STATUS_HEADER, s), "## Stash entries: %d", 
> stash_count);                                                                 
>    

That's a funny way to indent (dedent?) a body of an if() statement.

Don't scripts that read this output (I notice that this is also
called by wt_porcelain_print() function) expect that entries that
are led by "##" are about the current branch and its tracking
information?  

This patch would break these script by adding this new line using
the same "##" leader.

Reply via email to