Hi Hannes,
On Thu, 30 Jun 2016, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 29.06.2016 um 13:36 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
> > @@ -955,9 +955,8 @@ static struct merge_file_info merge_file_1(struct
> > merge_options *o,
> >
> > if (!sha_eq(a->sha1, b->sha1))
> > result.clean = 0;
> > - } else {
> > - die(_("unsupported object type in the tree"));
> > - }
> > + } else
> > + die(_("BUG: unsupported object type in the tree"));
>
> Would it perhaps make sense to remove the _() markup (here and a few more
> instances in this patch)? It's simpler for developers to find the code
> location when a "BUG:" is reported untranslated.
I would agree, but the purpose of this patch was not to fix that, but to
fix the inconsistency of the message.
Maybe as an add-on patch, with *all* 'die(_("BUG:' instances converted?
That would be even more outside the purview of my patch series than
touching the bug reports outside merge-recursive.c, though.
Ciao,
Dscho
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
