Fixed erroneous shouldIgnoreFile return value#543
Merged
joshaber merged 1 commit intolibgit2:masterfrom Jan 27, 2016
Merged
Conversation
…comment to reflect usage of NSURL instead of NSString
Member
|
Ha, nice catch 👍 |
joshaber
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 27, 2016
Fixed erroneous shouldIgnoreFile return value
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Per the git_status_should_ignore docs (emphasis mine):
However, the current implementation was returning YES ("the file should be ignored") if the ignore state was 0 ("the file should not be ignored").
Also tweaked the documentation comment to accurately describe the fileURL parameter; I tested and both an absolute path derived from an NSURL (currently in use) and a string path relative to the repository root work fine, so I didn't see any reason to change the method to match the documentation comment instead.