On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 01:41:27PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > - if (stdin_packs && filter_options.choice)
> > - die(_("cannot use --filter with --stdin-packs"));
> > + die_for_incompatible_opt2(filter_options.choice, "--filter",
> > + stdin_packs, "--stdin-packs");
>
> The order of check is now reversed (which does not make any
> difference to correctness or performance), but this way, we list the
> options in the same order in the message as before, which is nice.
Now I can't un-see it ;-). Even though it's not a correctness issue as
you note, the whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I'll swap the
ordering to match the original in the next round.
Thanks,
Taylor
