Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] bundle API: change "flags" to be "extra_index_pack_args"
- From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
- Date
- Aug 24, 2021, 21:41 UTC
- Message-ID
- <877dgaecum.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <30620e13-4509-1905-7644-9962b6adf9c5@gmail.com>
On Tue, Aug 24 2021, Derrick Stolee wrote:
Show 12 quoted lines
> On 8/23/2021 7:02 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> ...
>> --- a/builtin/bundle.c
>> +++ b/builtin/bundle.c
>> @@ -165,7 +165,8 @@ static int cmd_bundle_unbundle(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>> struct option options[] = {
>> OPT_END()
>> };
>> - char *bundle_file;
>> + char* bundle_file;
>
> nit: errant movement of "*" here.Ah, thanks.
Show 8 quoted lines
>> + struct strvec extra_args = STRVEC_INIT; > ... >> - ret = !!unbundle(the_repository, &header, bundle_fd, 0) || >> + ret = !!unbundle(the_repository, &header, bundle_fd, &extra_args) || > > I'm assuming that you will be adding something that adds to extra_args > in a future commit. It might be better to just convert the "0" to "NULL" > here and add extra_args when you actually use it.
*nod*, commented on in the later commit.
Show 18 quoted lines
>> int unbundle(struct repository *r, struct bundle_header *header,
>> - int bundle_fd, int flags)
>> + int bundle_fd, struct strvec *extra_index_pack_args)
>> {
>> - const char *argv_index_pack[] = {"index-pack",
>> - "--fix-thin", "--stdin", NULL, NULL};
>> struct child_process ip = CHILD_PROCESS_INIT;
>> + int i;
>>
>> - if (flags & BUNDLE_VERBOSE)
>> - argv_index_pack[3] = "-v";
>> + strvec_push(&ip.args, "index-pack");
>> + strvec_push(&ip.args, "--fix-thin");
>> + strvec_push(&ip.args, "--stdin");
>> + if (extra_index_pack_args) {
>> + struct strvec *extra = extra_index_pack_args;
>
> Creating a shorter variable name seems unnecessary.Will skip it.
Show 5 quoted lines
>> + for (i = 0; i < extra->nr; i++) >> + strvec_push(&ip.args, extra->v[i]); > > This seems like a good opportunity to create and use a > strvec_concat() method.
Yeah, I guess I could start with that. Will try it.
>> + strvec_clear(extra_index_pack_args); > > Why is it the responsibility of this method to clear these args? > I suppose it is convenient. It just seems a bit wrong to me.
Because of...
Show 10 quoted lines
>> /** >> * Unbundle after reading the header with read_bundle_header(). >> * >> * We'll invoke "git index-pack --stdin --fix-thin" for you on the >> * provided `bundle_fd` from read_bundle_header(). >> + * >> + * Provide extra_index_pack_args to pass any extra arguments >> + * (e.g. "-v" for verbose/progress), NULL otherwise. The provided >> + * extra_index_pack_args (if any) will be strvec_clear()'d for you >> + * (like the run-command.h API itself does).
... this, i.e. it's how the run-command.[ch] API already works for the same sort of thing elsewhere, I figured making them consistent was better than having them differ.
I think that while in general the rule of having each function allocate & clear its own memory is a good one, that a notable good exception in our codebase is various "one-shot" functions such as the run-command API, i.e. APIs where the vast majority of callers just want to set things up for a one-off run. Having those common cases not require a that_api_release(&ctx) afterwards seems like a good idea in general.
Show 27 quoted lines
>> */
>> int unbundle(struct repository *r, struct bundle_header *header,
>> - int bundle_fd, int flags);
>> + int bundle_fd, struct strvec *extra_index_pack_args);
>> int list_bundle_refs(struct bundle_header *header,
>> int argc, const char **argv);
>>
>> diff --git a/transport.c b/transport.c
>> index 17e9629710a..8bc4b5fcd3c 100644
>> --- a/transport.c
>> +++ b/transport.c
>> @@ -162,12 +162,15 @@ static int fetch_refs_from_bundle(struct transport *transport,
>> int nr_heads, struct ref **to_fetch)
>> {
>> struct bundle_transport_data *data = transport->data;
>> + struct strvec extra_index_pack_args = STRVEC_INIT;
>> int ret;
>>
>> + strvec_push(&extra_index_pack_args, "-v");
>> +
>> if (!data->get_refs_from_bundle_called)
>> get_refs_from_bundle(transport, 0, NULL);
>> ret = unbundle(the_repository, &data->header, data->fd,
>> - transport->progress ? BUNDLE_VERBOSE : 0);
>
> Previously, this was conditioned on 'transport->progress', but above
> you unconditionally add the "-v" option. Seems like a bug.Yes! Oops. Will fix. Thanks.