Elijah Newren <[email protected]> writes:
> Make sure we do the index == head check at the beginning of the merge,
> and error out immediately if it fails. While we're at it, fix a small
> leak in the show-the-error codepath.
As the call to repo_index_has_changes() is moved to the very
beginning of merge_recursive() and merge_trees(), the workhorse of
the merge machinery, merge_trees_internal(), can lose it.
> +static int merge_start(struct merge_options *opt, struct tree *head)
> +{
> + struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
> +
> + assert(opt->branch1 && opt->branch2);
This is a new assertion that did not exist in the original, isn't
it? I do not object to new sensible assertions, and I think these
two fields must be non-null in a freshly initialized merge_options
structure, but shouldn't we be discussing if these two fields should
be non-NULL, and if there are other fields in the same structure
that we should be adding new assertions on, in a separate step on
its own?
> + if (repo_index_has_changes(opt->repo, head, &sb)) {
> + err(opt, _("Your local changes to the following files would be
> overwritten by merge:\n %s"),
> + sb.buf);
> + strbuf_release(&sb);
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
