| Message ID | 20181012133321.20580-1-daniels@umanovskis.se (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v4] branch: introduce --show-current display option | expand |
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 9:34 AM Daniels Umanovskis <daniels@umanovskis.se> wrote: > When called with --show-current, git branch will print the current > branch name and terminate. Only the actual name gets printed, > without refs/heads. In detached HEAD state, nothing is output. > > Signed-off-by: Daniels Umanovskis <daniels@umanovskis.se> > --- > diff --git a/t/t3203-branch-output.sh b/t/t3203-branch-output.sh > @@ -100,6 +100,49 @@ test_expect_success 'git branch -v pattern does not show branch summaries' ' > +test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` works properly when tag exists' ' > + cat >expect <<-\EOF && > + branch-and-tag-name > + EOF > + test_when_finished "git branch -D branch-and-tag-name" && > + git checkout -b branch-and-tag-name && > + test_when_finished "git tag -d branch-and-tag-name" && > + git tag branch-and-tag-name && > + git branch --show-current >actual && > + git checkout branch-one && This cleanup "checkout" needs to be encapsulated within a test_when_finished(), doesn't it? Preferably just after the "git checkout -b" invocation. > + test_cmp expect actual > +'
Daniels Umanovskis <daniels@umanovskis.se> writes: > +test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` works properly with worktrees' ' > + cat >expect <<-\EOF && > + branch-one > + branch-two > + EOF > + git checkout branch-one && > + git worktree add worktree branch-two && > + ( > + git branch --show-current && > + cd worktree && > + git branch --show-current This is not wrong per-se, but git branch --show-current && git -C worktree branch --show-current would be shorter. > + ) >actual && > + test_cmp expect actual > +'
Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes: >> +test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` works properly when tag exists' ' >> + cat >expect <<-\EOF && >> + branch-and-tag-name >> + EOF >> + test_when_finished "git branch -D branch-and-tag-name" && >> + git checkout -b branch-and-tag-name && >> + test_when_finished "git tag -d branch-and-tag-name" && >> + git tag branch-and-tag-name && >> + git branch --show-current >actual && >> + git checkout branch-one && > > This cleanup "checkout" needs to be encapsulated within a > test_when_finished(), doesn't it? Preferably just after the "git > checkout -b" invocation. In the meantime, here is what I'll have in 'pu' on top. t/t3203-branch-output.sh | 9 +++++---- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/t3203-branch-output.sh b/t/t3203-branch-output.sh index 1bf708dffc..d1f4fec9de 100755 --- a/t/t3203-branch-output.sh +++ b/t/t3203-branch-output.sh @@ -119,12 +119,14 @@ test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` works properly when tag exists' cat >expect <<-\EOF && branch-and-tag-name EOF - test_when_finished "git branch -D branch-and-tag-name" && + test_when_finished " + git checkout branch-one + git branch -D branch-and-tag-name + " && git checkout -b branch-and-tag-name && test_when_finished "git tag -d branch-and-tag-name" && git tag branch-and-tag-name && git branch --show-current >actual && - git checkout branch-one && test_cmp expect actual ' @@ -137,8 +139,7 @@ test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` works properly with worktrees' git worktree add worktree branch-two && ( git branch --show-current && - cd worktree && - git branch --show-current + git -C worktree branch --show-current ) >actual && test_cmp expect actual '
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 7:09 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote: > Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes: > > This cleanup "checkout" needs to be encapsulated within a > > test_when_finished(), doesn't it? Preferably just after the "git > > checkout -b" invocation. > > In the meantime, here is what I'll have in 'pu' on top. > > diff --git a/t/t3203-branch-output.sh b/t/t3203-branch-output.sh > @@ -119,12 +119,14 @@ test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` works properly when tag exists' > cat >expect <<-\EOF && > branch-and-tag-name > EOF > - test_when_finished "git branch -D branch-and-tag-name" && > + test_when_finished " > + git checkout branch-one > + git branch -D branch-and-tag-name > + " && > git checkout -b branch-and-tag-name && > test_when_finished "git tag -d branch-and-tag-name" && > git tag branch-and-tag-name && > git branch --show-current >actual && > - git checkout branch-one && > test_cmp expect actual > ' This make sense to me. > @@ -137,8 +139,7 @@ test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` works properly with worktrees' > git worktree add worktree branch-two && > ( > git branch --show-current && > - cd worktree && > - git branch --show-current > + git -C worktree branch --show-current > ) >actual && > test_cmp expect actual > ' The subshell '(...)' could become '{...}' now that the 'cd' is gone, but that's a minor point.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 03:33:21PM +0200, Daniels Umanovskis wrote: > Intended both for scripting and interactive/informative use. > Unlike git branch --list, no filtering is needed to just get the > branch name. Are we going forward with advertising this as a scriptable alternative? > + } else if (show_current) { > + print_current_branch_name(); > + return 0; Do we need the slightly different check done in print_current_branch_name() ? A very similar check is already done early in cmd_branch. builtin/branch.c:671 head = resolve_refdup("HEAD", 0, &head_oid, NULL); if (!head) die(_("Failed to resolve HEAD as a valid ref.")); if (!strcmp(head, "HEAD")) filter.detached = 1; else if (!skip_prefix(head, "refs/heads/", &head)) die(_("HEAD not found below refs/heads!")); What's being proposed can be achieved with + } else if (show_current) { + if (!filter.detached) + puts(head); + return 0; without failing tests. -- Cheers, Rafael Ascensão
Hi Eric, On Tue, 16 Oct 2018, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 7:09 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote: > > Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes: > > > This cleanup "checkout" needs to be encapsulated within a > > > test_when_finished(), doesn't it? Preferably just after the "git > > > checkout -b" invocation. > > > > In the meantime, here is what I'll have in 'pu' on top. > > > > diff --git a/t/t3203-branch-output.sh b/t/t3203-branch-output.sh > > @@ -119,12 +119,14 @@ test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` works properly when tag exists' > > cat >expect <<-\EOF && > > branch-and-tag-name > > EOF > > - test_when_finished "git branch -D branch-and-tag-name" && > > + test_when_finished " > > + git checkout branch-one > > + git branch -D branch-and-tag-name > > + " && > > git checkout -b branch-and-tag-name && > > test_when_finished "git tag -d branch-and-tag-name" && > > git tag branch-and-tag-name && > > git branch --show-current >actual && > > - git checkout branch-one && > > test_cmp expect actual > > ' > > This make sense to me. > > > @@ -137,8 +139,7 @@ test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` works properly with worktrees' > > git worktree add worktree branch-two && > > ( > > git branch --show-current && > > - cd worktree && > > - git branch --show-current > > + git -C worktree branch --show-current > > ) >actual && > > test_cmp expect actual > > ' > > The subshell '(...)' could become '{...}' now that the 'cd' is gone, > but that's a minor point. Maybe not so minor. I realized yesterday that the &&-chain linting we use for every single test case takes a noticeable chunk of time: $ time ./t0006-date.sh --quiet # passed all 67 test(s) 1..67 real 0m20.973s user 0m2.662s sys 0m14.789s $ time ./t0006-date.sh --quiet --no-chain-lint # passed all 67 test(s) 1..67 real 0m13.607s user 0m1.330s sys 0m8.070s My suspicion: it is essentially the `(exit 117)` that adds about 100ms to every of those 67 test cases. (Remember: a subshell requires a fork, and the `fork()` emulation on Windows requires all kinds of things to be copied to a new process, including memory and open file descriptors, before the `exec()` will undo at least part of that.) With that in mind, I would like to suggest that we should start to be very careful about using subshells in our test suite. Ciao, Dscho
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:18 AM Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote: > I realized yesterday that the &&-chain linting we use for every single > test case takes a noticeable chunk of time: > > $ time ./t0006-date.sh --quiet > real 0m20.973s > $ time ./t0006-date.sh --quiet --no-chain-lint > real 0m13.607s > > My suspicion: it is essentially the `(exit 117)` that adds about 100ms to > every of those 67 test cases. The subshell chain-linter adds a 'sed' and 'grep' invocation to each test which doesn't help. (v1 of the subshell chain-linter only added a 'sed', but that changed with v2.) > With that in mind, I would like to suggest that we should start to be very > careful about using subshells in our test suite. You could disable the subshell chain-linter like this if you want test the (exit 117) goop in isolation: --- 8< --- diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh index 3f95bfda60..48323e503c 100644 --- a/t/test-lib.sh +++ b/t/test-lib.sh @@ -675,8 +675,7 @@ test_run_ () { trace= # 117 is magic because it is unlikely to match the exit # code of other programs - if $(printf '%s\n' "$1" | sed -f "$GIT_BUILD_DIR/t/chainlint.sed" | grep -q '?![A-Z][A-Z]*?!') || - test "OK-117" != "$(test_eval_ "(exit 117) && $1${LF}${LF}echo OK-\$?" 3>&1)" + if test "OK-117" != "$(test_eval_ "(exit 117) && $1${LF}${LF}echo OK-\$?" 3>&1)" then error "bug in the test script: broken &&-chain or run-away HERE-DOC: $1" fi --- 8< ---
On 10/17/18 11:39 AM, Rafael Ascensão wrote: > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 03:33:21PM +0200, Daniels Umanovskis wrote: >> Intended both for scripting and interactive/informative use. >> Unlike git branch --list, no filtering is needed to just get the >> branch name. > > Are we going forward with advertising this as a scriptable alternative? That's probably up to the maintainers, but I would not explicitly point it out as a script command, so my patch doesn't mention scripting use in the documentation for it. In reality it's useful for "soft scripting" like setting the shell $PS1, which doesn't require API stability guarantees the way proper scripts do.
Hi Eric, On Wed, 17 Oct 2018, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:18 AM Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote: > > I realized yesterday that the &&-chain linting we use for every single > > test case takes a noticeable chunk of time: > > > > $ time ./t0006-date.sh --quiet > > real 0m20.973s > > $ time ./t0006-date.sh --quiet --no-chain-lint > > real 0m13.607s > > > > My suspicion: it is essentially the `(exit 117)` that adds about 100ms to > > every of those 67 test cases. > > The subshell chain-linter adds a 'sed' and 'grep' invocation to each test which doesn't help. (v1 of the subshell chain-linter only added a 'sed', but that changed with v2.) > > > With that in mind, I would like to suggest that we should start to be very > > careful about using subshells in our test suite. > > You could disable the subshell chain-linter like this if you want test the (exit 117) goop in isolation: > > --- 8< --- > diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh > index 3f95bfda60..48323e503c 100644 > --- a/t/test-lib.sh > +++ b/t/test-lib.sh > @@ -675,8 +675,7 @@ test_run_ () { > trace= > # 117 is magic because it is unlikely to match the exit > # code of other programs > - if $(printf '%s\n' "$1" | sed -f "$GIT_BUILD_DIR/t/chainlint.sed" | grep -q '?![A-Z][A-Z]*?!') || > - test "OK-117" != "$(test_eval_ "(exit 117) && $1${LF}${LF}echo OK-\$?" 3>&1)" > + if test "OK-117" != "$(test_eval_ "(exit 117) && $1${LF}${LF}echo OK-\$?" 3>&1)" > then > error "bug in the test script: broken &&-chain or run-away HERE-DOC: $1" > fi > --- 8< --- You're right! This is actually responsible for about five of those seven seconds. The subshell still hurts a little, as it means that every single of the almost 20,000 test cases we have gets slowed down by ~0.03s, which amounts to almost 10 minutes. This is "only" for the Windows phase of our Continuous Testing, of course. Yet I think we can do better than this. How difficult/involved, do you think, would it be to add a t/helper/ command for chain linting? Ciao, Dscho
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:51 AM Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Oct 2018, Eric Sunshine wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:18 AM Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote: > > > My suspicion: it is essentially the `(exit 117)` that adds about 100ms to > > > every of those 67 test cases. > > > > The subshell chain-linter adds a 'sed' and 'grep' invocation to each test which doesn't help. (v1 of the subshell chain-linter only added a 'sed', but that changed with v2.) > > You could disable the subshell chain-linter like this if you want test the (exit 117) goop in isolation: > > You're right! This is actually responsible for about five of those seven > seconds. The subshell still hurts a little, as it means that every single > of the almost 20,000 test cases we have gets slowed down by ~0.03s, which > amounts to almost 10 minutes. > > This is "only" for the Windows phase of our Continuous Testing, of course. > Yet I think we can do better than this. > > How difficult/involved, do you think, would it be to add a t/helper/ > command for chain linting? Probably more effort than it's worth, and it would only save one process invocation. Since the subshell portion of the chain-linting is done by pure textual inspection, an alternative I had considered was to just perform it as a preprocess over the entire test suite, much like the other t/Makefile "test-lint" targets. In other words, the entire test suite might be tested in one go with something like this: sed -f chainlint.sed t*.sh | grep -q '?![A-Z][A-Z]*?!' && echo "BROKEN &&-chain" That won't work today since chainlint.sed isn't written to understand everything which we might see outside of a test_expect_*, but doing it that way is within the realm of possibility. There were two reasons why I didn't pursue that approach. First, although I was expecting Windows folks to complain (or at least speak up) about the extra 'sed' and 'grep', nobody did, so my impression was that those two extra commands were likely lost in the noise of the rest of the boilerplate commands invoked by test_expect_success(), test_run_(), test_eval_(), etc., and by whatever expensive commands are invoked by each test itself. Second, the top-level &&-chain "(exit 117)" linting kicks in even when you run a single test script manually, say after editing a test, which is exactly when you want to discover that you botched a &&-chain, so it seemed a good idea for the subshell &&-chain linter to follow suit. The t/Makefile "test-lint" targets, on the other hand, don't kick in when running test scripts in isolation. However, a pragmatic way to gain back those 10 minutes might be simply to disable the chain-linter for continuous integration testing on Windows, but leave it enabled on other platforms. This way, we'd still catch broken &&-chains, with the exception of tests which are specific to Windows, of which I think there are very few.
diff --git a/Documentation/git-branch.txt b/Documentation/git-branch.txt index bf5316ffa..0babb9b1b 100644 --- a/Documentation/git-branch.txt +++ b/Documentation/git-branch.txt @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ SYNOPSIS -------- [verse] 'git branch' [--color[=<when>] | --no-color] [-r | -a] - [--list] [-v [--abbrev=<length> | --no-abbrev]] + [--list] [--show-current] [-v [--abbrev=<length> | --no-abbrev]] [--column[=<options>] | --no-column] [--sort=<key>] [(--merged | --no-merged) [<commit>]] [--contains [<commit]] [--no-contains [<commit>]] @@ -160,6 +160,10 @@ This option is only applicable in non-verbose mode. branch --list 'maint-*'`, list only the branches that match the pattern(s). +--show-current:: + Print the name of the current branch. In detached HEAD state, + nothing is printed. + -v:: -vv:: --verbose:: diff --git a/builtin/branch.c b/builtin/branch.c index c396c4153..46f91dc06 100644 --- a/builtin/branch.c +++ b/builtin/branch.c @@ -443,6 +443,21 @@ static void print_ref_list(struct ref_filter *filter, struct ref_sorting *sortin free(to_free); } +static void print_current_branch_name(void) +{ + int flags; + const char *refname = resolve_ref_unsafe("HEAD", 0, NULL, &flags); + const char *shortname; + if (!refname) + die(_("could not resolve HEAD")); + else if (!(flags & REF_ISSYMREF)) + return; + else if (skip_prefix(refname, "refs/heads/", &shortname)) + puts(shortname); + else + die(_("HEAD (%s) points outside of refs/heads/"), refname); +} + static void reject_rebase_or_bisect_branch(const char *target) { struct worktree **worktrees = get_worktrees(0); @@ -581,6 +596,7 @@ static int edit_branch_description(const char *branch_name) int cmd_branch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) { int delete = 0, rename = 0, copy = 0, force = 0, list = 0; + int show_current = 0; int reflog = 0, edit_description = 0; int quiet = 0, unset_upstream = 0; const char *new_upstream = NULL; @@ -620,6 +636,7 @@ int cmd_branch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) OPT_BIT('c', "copy", ©, N_("copy a branch and its reflog"), 1), OPT_BIT('C', NULL, ©, N_("copy a branch, even if target exists"), 2), OPT_BOOL('l', "list", &list, N_("list branch names")), + OPT_BOOL(0, "show-current", &show_current, N_("show current branch name")), OPT_BOOL(0, "create-reflog", &reflog, N_("create the branch's reflog")), OPT_BOOL(0, "edit-description", &edit_description, N_("edit the description for the branch")), @@ -662,14 +679,15 @@ int cmd_branch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, options, builtin_branch_usage, 0); - if (!delete && !rename && !copy && !edit_description && !new_upstream && !unset_upstream && argc == 0) + if (!delete && !rename && !copy && !edit_description && !new_upstream && + !show_current && !unset_upstream && argc == 0) list = 1; if (filter.with_commit || filter.merge != REF_FILTER_MERGED_NONE || filter.points_at.nr || filter.no_commit) list = 1; - if (!!delete + !!rename + !!copy + !!new_upstream + + if (!!delete + !!rename + !!copy + !!new_upstream + !!show_current + list + unset_upstream > 1) usage_with_options(builtin_branch_usage, options); @@ -697,6 +715,9 @@ int cmd_branch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) if (!argc) die(_("branch name required")); return delete_branches(argc, argv, delete > 1, filter.kind, quiet); + } else if (show_current) { + print_current_branch_name(); + return 0; } else if (list) { /* git branch --local also shows HEAD when it is detached */ if ((filter.kind & FILTER_REFS_BRANCHES) && filter.detached) diff --git a/t/t3203-branch-output.sh b/t/t3203-branch-output.sh index ee6787614..1bf708dff 100755 --- a/t/t3203-branch-output.sh +++ b/t/t3203-branch-output.sh @@ -100,6 +100,49 @@ test_expect_success 'git branch -v pattern does not show branch summaries' ' test_must_fail git branch -v branch* ' +test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` shows current branch' ' + cat >expect <<-\EOF && + branch-two + EOF + git checkout branch-two && + git branch --show-current >actual && + test_cmp expect actual +' + +test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` is silent when detached HEAD' ' + git checkout HEAD^0 && + git branch --show-current >actual && + test_must_be_empty actual +' + +test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` works properly when tag exists' ' + cat >expect <<-\EOF && + branch-and-tag-name + EOF + test_when_finished "git branch -D branch-and-tag-name" && + git checkout -b branch-and-tag-name && + test_when_finished "git tag -d branch-and-tag-name" && + git tag branch-and-tag-name && + git branch --show-current >actual && + git checkout branch-one && + test_cmp expect actual +' + +test_expect_success 'git branch `--show-current` works properly with worktrees' ' + cat >expect <<-\EOF && + branch-one + branch-two + EOF + git checkout branch-one && + git worktree add worktree branch-two && + ( + git branch --show-current && + cd worktree && + git branch --show-current + ) >actual && + test_cmp expect actual +' + test_expect_success 'git branch shows detached HEAD properly' ' cat >expect <<EOF && * (HEAD detached at $(git rev-parse --short HEAD^0))
When called with --show-current, git branch will print the current branch name and terminate. Only the actual name gets printed, without refs/heads. In detached HEAD state, nothing is output. Intended both for scripting and interactive/informative use. Unlike git branch --list, no filtering is needed to just get the branch name. Signed-off-by: Daniels Umanovskis <daniels@umanovskis.se> --- Compared to v3, fixed up test cases according to Junio's input Documentation/git-branch.txt | 6 +++++- builtin/branch.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++-- t/t3203-branch-output.sh | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)