From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 11:59:47 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] give "nbuf" strbuf a more meaningful name
Message-ID: <20160131115947.GA5438@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1601311245170.2964@virtualbox>

On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 12:54:29PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

> Hi Peff,
> 
> On Sun, 31 Jan 2016, Jeff King wrote:
> 
> > > It's a shame that we can't just factor out this common
> > > code, but I don't think it's quite long enough to merit
> > > the boilerplate. The interesting part of each function
> > > happens inside the loop. If C had lambdas, we could do
> > > something like:
> > > 
> > >   foreach_path_from(stdin, nul_term_line) {
> > >         /* now do something interesting with "buf"
> > >            and some other local variables */
> > >   }
> 
> Technically, we do not have to do lambdas for that paradigm, we could
> introduce a new data type and a reader, i.e. something like this:
> [...]
> And then the repeated code could be replaced by something like this:
> 
> 	struct path_reader path_reader = PATH_READER_INIT;
> 
> 	while (read_next_path(&reader, stdin, 1)) {
> 		... [work with reader->path.buf] ...
> 	}
> 
> 	cleanup_path_reader();

Yeah, you're right. I was thinking of lifting the loop completely out of
the call-sites, but simplifying it to a single line loop condition is
just as good.

I still think this crosses my line of "too much boilerplate to be worth
it", though.

-Peff