Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> writes: > >>> On the other hand, for a file-scope static that is likely to stay as a >>> non-API function but a local helper, it may not be worth it. >> >> Oh, do you think that `reset_head()` is likely to stay as non-API >> function? I found myself in the need of repeating this tedious >> unpack_trees() dance quite a few times over the past two years, and it is >> *always* daunting because the API is *that* unintuitive. >> >> So I *do* hope that `reset_head()` will actually be moved to reset.[ch] >> eventually, and callsites e.g. in `sequencer.c` will be converted from >> calling `unpack_trees()` to calling `reset_head()` instead. > > As long as the public API function is well thought out, of course it > is OK. Ideally, builtin/reset.c can detect when it is making a hard > reset to HEAD and call that same function. Which may or may not > mean you would also want to tell it to record ORIG_HEAD and remove > MERGE_HEAD and others), perhaps with another bit in that flag word.
Nah, forget about that one. It sometimes does branch switching and sometimes does hard reset, which looks like a strange chimera. We shouldn't burden it further by adding "while at it remove cruft, as 'reset --hard' needs to do that" to it.
