If you were on 'frotz' branch before you checked out your current
branch, "git merge @{-1}~22" means the same as "git merge frotz~22".
The strbuf_branchname() function, when interpret_branch_name() gives
up resolving "@{-1}~22" fully, returns "frotz" and tells the caller
that it only resolved "@{-1}" part of the input, mistakes this as a
total failure, and appends the whole thing to the result, yielding
"frotz@{-1}~22", which does not make any sense.
Inspect the return value from interpret_branch_name() a bit more
carefully. When it errored out without consuming anything, we will
get -1 and we should return the whole thing. Otherwise, we should
append the remainder (i.e. "~22" in the earlier example) to the
partially resolved name (i.e. "frotz").
The test suite adds enough number of checkout to make @{-12} in the
last test in t0100 that tried to check "we haven't flipped branches
that many times" error case succeed; raise the number to a hundred.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
1.6.2 will have @{-1} syntax advertised as "usable anywhere you can use
a branch name". However, "git merge @{-1}" did not work.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This teaches the new "@{-1} syntax to refer to the previous branch to "git
branch". After looking at somebody's faulty patch series on a topic
branch too long, if you decide it is not worth merging, you can just say:
$ git checkout master
$ git branch -D @{-1}
to get rid of it without having to type the name of the topic you now hate
so much for wasting a lot of your time.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
