Re: [Janitors] value could be NULL in config parser

From: Govind Salinas <govind@sophiasuchtig.com>
Date: Feb 9, 2008, 01:20 UTC
Message-ID: <5d46db230802081720x122a807do6c63b6b3e435b4c5@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7v63x0lzhw.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

On 2/8/08, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 19 quoted lines

> A callback function of git_config() is called when the command
> reads value from .git/config and friends.  The function takes
> two parameters, var and value.  var is never NULL and it is the
> name of the configuration variable found in the file being
> read.  value could be either string or NULL.
>
> A NULL value is boolean "true".  For example, on MS-DOS, you may
> have something like this:
>
>         [core]
>                 autocrlf
>
> and your callback will be called with var = "core.autocrlf" and
> value = NULL in such a case.
>
> If you want to fix them (you do not have to do all of them, and
> if you would like to help, please make one patch per function
> fixed), the procedure is:
>

I think I got all the erroneous ones.  I did

find . -name "*.c" | xargs grep git_config\( | awk '{ idx = index($2, ")"); p = substr($2, 12, idx - 12); print p }' | sort | uniq -u

To try and get a list of all the ones that might need updating. I did notice that most functions never check value for null, but they don't directly access them. They pass them off to other methods. As far as I can tell, some of these methods don't validate the NULL. So they will need to be updated.

Question. Wouldn't it reduce the amount of validation we have to do if whoever is calling back checked null and assigned an empty string? If so, we can probably replace all these patches with one patch.

-Govind