Re: [RFC] Update on builtin-commit

From: Kristian Høgsberg <krh@redhat.com>
Date: Jul 2, 2007, 16:51 UTC
Message-ID: <1183395082.30611.16.camel@hinata.boston.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0707021709120.4071@racer.site>

On Mon, 2007-07-02 at 17:11 +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

> just a quick comment on the option parser:
> 
> On most platforms, sizeof(void*)>=sizeof(int). But I would not rely on 
> that. Rather (also because it is prettier), I'd use "union".

In the OPTION_INTEGER case, the 'value' void pointer points to an integer global that's set to the value passed. In the OPTION_NONE, it also points to an integer, which is set to 1 if the option is seen. So I'm relying on sizeof(void*) == sizeof(int*), but I'm not storing ints in pointers.

> Besides, your option parser loses order information, correct? IOW, 
> something like "--color --no-color --color" would confuse it.

Yes, I don't record the order of options, but in the builtin-commit case, I don't think there are any options where that makes a difference? In cases where order is important or we have an option that negates the effect of another option (your --no-color example), we could either 1) extend the option struct with a 'disable' name that flips the value back to 0 or 2) instead of just setting it to 1, record the index of the options passed and compare the indexes of conflicting options to see which one was passed last.

Kristian