Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] promisor-remote: read partialClone config here

>
> > > @@ -99,6 +94,15 @@ static int promisor_remote_config(const char *var, const char *value, void *data
> > >         size_t namelen;
> > >         const char *subkey;
> > >
> > > +       if (!strcmp(var, "extensions.partialclone")) {
> > > +               /*
> > > +                * NULL value is handled in handle_extension_v0 in setup.c.
> > > +                */
> > > +               if (value)
> > > +                       repository_format_partial_clone = xstrdup(value);
> > > +               return 0;
> > > +       }
> >
> > This is actually slightly hard to parse out.  I was trying to figure
> > out where repository_format_partial_clone was initialized, and it's
> > not handled when value is NULL in handle_extension_v0; it's the fact
> > that repository_format_partial_clone is declared a static global
> > variable.
> >
> > But in the next patch you make it a member of struct
> > promisor_remote_config, and instead rely on the xcalloc call in
> > promisor_remote_init().
> >
> > That means everything is properly initialized and you haven't made any
> > mistakes here, but the logic is a bit hard to follow.  Perhaps it'd be
> > nicer to just write this as
> >
> > +       if (!strcmp(var, "extensions.partialclone")) {
> > +               repository_format_partial_clone = xstrdup_or_null(value);
> > +               return 0;
> > +       }
> >
> > which makes the code shorter and easier to follow, at least for me.
>
> Hmm...is your concern about the case in which
> repository_format_partial_clone is uninitialized, or about ignoring a
> potential NULL value? If the former, I don't see how your suggestion
> fixes things, since extensions.partialclone may never have been in the
> config in the first place (and would thus leave
> repository_format_partial_clone uninitialized, if it weren't for the
> fact that it is in static storage and thus initialized to 0). If the
> latter, I guess I should be more detailed about how it's being handled
> in setup.c (or maybe just leave out the comment altogether - the code
> here can handle a NULL repository_format_partial_clone for some reason).