Re: [PATCH 1/4] config: factor out config file stack management

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 26, 2013, 20:15 UTC
Message-ID: <20130226201518.GC13830@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20130226200940.GF22756@sandbox-ub>

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 09:09:41PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> > This function name is a bit weird. I would have thought the "from" here
> > was going to be a file, or a string, or whatever. But the filename setup
> > happens outside this function (and yet this function depends on it being
> > set up, as it calls git_parse_file). But maybe it will get less
> > confusing with the other patches on top...
> 
> The "do_config_from" means "parse from whatever is in 'top'". Later in
> the series its type changes from config_file to struct config.

Ah, I see. The "from" is the "struct config".

I wonder if it would be more obvious with the more usual OO-struct functions, like:

  struct config_source {
          ...
  };
  void config_source_init_file(struct config_source *, const char *fn);
  void config_source_init_strbuf(struct config_source *,
                                 const struct strbuf *buf);
  void config_source_clear(struct config_source *);

  int config_source_parse(struct config_source *);

and then the use would be something like:

  struct config_source top;
  int ret;

  config_source_init_file(&top, "foo");
  ret = config_source_parse(&top);
  config_source_clear(&top);

  return ret;

I.e., "init" constructors, a "clear" destructor, and any methods like "parse" that you need. I haven't though too hard about it, though, so maybe there is some reason it does not fit that model (it is a little uncommon that the "init" would push itself onto a stack, but I think that's OK).

-Peff