Re: [PATCH 1/1] pretty-formats: add hard truncation, without ellipsis, options

From: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.email>
Date: Oct 30, 2022, 22:01 UTC
Message-ID: <85f56b56-74c5-ffe5-703f-ef0c1e6d3b45@iee.email>
In-Reply-To: <Y17PS/2LgRIJKGoo@nand.local>

On 30/10/2022 19:23, Taylor Blau wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 06:56:14PM +0000, Philip Oakley wrote:
>> Instead of replacing with "..", replace with the empty string "",
>> having adjusted the padding length calculation.
>>
>> Needswork:
>> There are no tests for these pretty formats, before or after
>> this change.
> Hmmph. I see some when searching for l?trunc in
> t4205-log-pretty-formats.sh. Is that coverage not sufficient for the
> existing feature?
>
> If so, it would be nice to see it bulked up to add coverage where we
> are missing some. Either way, we should make sure the new code is
> covered before continuing.

No idea how I missed them. Maybe I'd filtered, by accident, the search by a too narrow list of file types.

Thanks for that pointer.

Show 18 quoted lines

>> @@ -1743,6 +1749,16 @@ static size_t format_and_pad_commit(struct strbuf *sb, /* in UTF-8 */
>>  					    padding - 2, len - (padding - 2),
>>  					    "..");
>>  			break;
>> +		case trunc_left_hard:
>> +			strbuf_utf8_replace(&local_sb,
>> +					    0, len - (padding),
>> +					    "");
>> +			break;
>> +		case trunc_right_hard:
>> +			strbuf_utf8_replace(&local_sb,
>> +					    padding, len - (padding),
>> +					    "");
>> +			break;
> If I remember correctly, strbuf_utf8_replace() supports taking NULL as
> its last argument, though upon searching I couldn't find any callers
> that behave that way. Can we use that instead of supplying the empty
> string? If not, should we drop support for the NULL-as-last-argument?

I wasalso concerned about zero length strings but my brief look at the code indicated it could cope with a zero length string. The last param is `const char *subst`.

I've just relooked at the code and it does have a

     if (subst)
        subst_len = strlen(subst);

so it does look safe to pass NULL, though it would probably cause a pause for thought for readers, and isn't likely to be that much faster in these format scenarios.

>
> Thanks,
> Taylor

-- Philip