Re: [PATCH 1/3] usage: refactor die-recursion checks
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Apr 15, 2013, 23:47 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20130415234725.GA8031@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAPig+cQtXO_jvymrT1Y69W+bhJ908o3HNABj1eVLN5zdJtpT+Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 07:45:03PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:
Show 6 quoted lines
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote: > > This patch teaches die() to print the original die message > > to stderr before reporting the recursion. The custom > > die_routine may or may not have put it the message to > > s/put it the/emitted/ perhaps?
I meant s/ it//, but I think "sent the message to..." is probably more clear.
Show 11 quoted lines
> > stderr, but this is the best we can do (it is what most > > handlers will do anyway, and it is where our recursion error > > will go). > > > > While we're at it, let's mark the "recursion detected" > > message as a "BUG:", since it should never happen in > > practice. And let's factor out the repeated code in die and > > die_errno. This loses the information of which function was > > called to cause the recursion, but it's important; knowing > > Was this supposed to be s/important/unimportant/?
Urgh, yes, it was originally "not important" but I lost the "not" while trying to clarify the wording.
Thanks.
-Peff