Re: [PATCH 02/12] name-hash: add index_dir_exists2()

> "Jeff Hostetler via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> From: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhostetler@github.com>
>>
>> Create a new version of index_dir_exists() to return the canonical
>> spelling of the matched directory prefix.
>>
>> The existing index_dir_exists() returns a boolean to indicate if
>> there is a case-insensitive match in the directory name-hash, but
>> it doesn't tell the caller the exact spelling of that match.
>>
>> The new version also copies the matched spelling to a provided strbuf.
>> This lets the caller, for example, then call index_name_pos() with the
>> correct case to search the cache-entry array for the real insertion
>> position.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhostetler@github.com>
>> ---
>>   name-hash.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>>   name-hash.h |  2 ++
>>   2 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/name-hash.c b/name-hash.c
>> index 251f036eef6..d735c81acb3 100644
>> --- a/name-hash.c
>> +++ b/name-hash.c
>> @@ -694,6 +694,22 @@ int index_dir_exists(struct index_state *istate, const char *name, int namelen)
>>   	dir = find_dir_entry(istate, name, namelen);
>>   	return dir && dir->nr;
>>   }
>> +int index_dir_exists2(struct index_state *istate, const char *name, int namelen,
>> +		      struct strbuf *canonical_path)
>> +{
>> +	struct dir_entry *dir;
>> +
>> +	strbuf_init(canonical_path, namelen+1);
>> +
>> +	lazy_init_name_hash(istate);
>> +	expand_to_path(istate, name, namelen, 0);
>> +	dir = find_dir_entry(istate, name, namelen);
>> +
>> +	if (dir && dir->nr)
>> +		strbuf_add(canonical_path, dir->name, dir->namelen);
>> +
>> +	return dir && dir->nr;
>> +}
>>   
>>   void adjust_dirname_case(struct index_state *istate, char *name)
> 
> Missing inter-function blank line, before the new function.
> 
> I wonder if we can avoid such repetition---the body of
> index_dir_exists() is 100% shared with this new function.
> 
> Isn't it extremely unusual to receive "struct strbuf *" and call
> strbuf_init() on it?  It means that the caller is expected to have a
> strbuf and pass a pointer to it, but also it is expected to leave
> the strbuf uninitialized.
> 
> I'd understand if it calls strbuf_reset(), but it may not even be
> necessary, if we make it responsibility of the caller to pass a
> valid strbuf to be appended into.
> 
> 	int index_dir_find(struct index_state *istate,
> 			   const char *name, int namelen,
> 			   struct strbuf *canonical_path)
> 	{
>                  struct dir_entry *dir;
> 
>                  lazy_init_name_hash(istate);
>                  expand_to_path(istate, name, namelen, 0);
>                  dir = find_dir_entry(istate, name, namelen);
> 
>                  if (canonical_path && dir && dir->nr) {
> 			// strbuf_reset(canonical_path); ???
>                  	strbuf_add(canonical_path, dir->name, dir->namelen);
> 		}
>                  return dir && dir->nr;
> 	}
> 
> Then we can do
> 
> 	#define index_dir_exists(i, n, l) index_dir_find((i), (n), (l), NULL)
> 
> in the header for existing callers.
>