Re: [PATCH v1 23/45] check-ignore: convert to use parse_pathspec

From: Adam Spiers <git@adamspiers.org>
Date: Apr 12, 2013, 15:03 UTC
Message-ID: <20130412150304.GH26949@pacific.linksys.moosehall>
In-Reply-To: <1363327620-29017-24-git-send-email-pclouds@gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 01:06:38PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:

> check-ignore (at least the test suite) seems to rely on the pattern
> order. PATHSPEC_KEEP_ORDER is introduced to explictly express this.
> The lack of PATHSPEC_MAXDEPTH_VALID is sufficient because it's the
> only flag that reorders pathspecs, but it's less obvious that way.

Sorry for the slow response - I only just noticed this today. (It would be useful if any future patches to check-ignore Cc: me explicitly, to catch my mail filters.)

Show 35 quoted lines

> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
> ---
>  builtin/check-ignore.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>  pathspec.c             |  6 +++++-
>  pathspec.h             |  1 +
>  t/t0008-ignores.sh     |  8 ++++----
>  4 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/builtin/check-ignore.c b/builtin/check-ignore.c
> index 0240f99..6e55f06 100644
> --- a/builtin/check-ignore.c
> +++ b/builtin/check-ignore.c
> @@ -53,14 +53,14 @@ static void output_exclude(const char *path, struct exclude *exclude)
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -static int check_ignore(const char *prefix, const char **pathspec)
> +static int check_ignore(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>  {
>  	struct dir_struct dir;
> -	const char *path, *full_path;
>  	char *seen;
>  	int num_ignored = 0, dtype = DT_UNKNOWN, i;
>  	struct path_exclude_check check;
>  	struct exclude *exclude;
> +	struct pathspec pathspec;
>  
>  	/* read_cache() is only necessary so we can watch out for submodules. */
>  	if (read_cache() < 0)
> @@ -70,31 +70,39 @@ static int check_ignore(const char *prefix, const char **pathspec)
>  	dir.flags |= DIR_COLLECT_IGNORED;
>  	setup_standard_excludes(&dir);
>  
> -	if (!pathspec || !*pathspec) {
> +	if (!argc) {

Is there a compelling reason for introducing argc as a new parameter to check_ignore(), other than simplifying the above line? And why rename the pathspec parameter to argv? Both these changes are misleading AFAICS, since paths provided to check_ignore() can come from sources other than CLI arguments (i.e. via --stdin).

The introduction of argc also makes it possible to invoke check_ignore() with arguments which are not self-consistent.

I haven't been following your pathspec work, but FWIW the other changes in this patch look reasonable at a glance.

Thanks, Adam