From: Paul Tan <pyokagan@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 07:11:01 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/19] parse-options-cb: implement parse_opt_pass_argv_array()
Message-ID: <CACRoPnRVjNseXPOxKe4_3rnKXmAYeA80iCHY3o8euWA=EUX6hA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqr3pkwjz6.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 7:16 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Almost the same comment as 01/19 applies to this comment.
>
> I think it makes good sense to have two variants, one that lets the
> last one win and pass only that last one (i.e. 01/19) and the other
> that accumulates them into an argv_array (i.e. this one).  But it
> feels iffy, given that the "acculate" version essentially creates an
> array of (char *), to make "the last one wins, leaving a single
> string" to use strbuf.  I'd find it much more understandable if 01/19
> took (char **) as opt->value instead of a strbuf.

I don't see how it feels iffy. The purpose of using strbufs (and
argv_arrays) is to avoid error-prone manual memory management.

> In any case, these two need to be added as a related pair to the API
> documentation.

Okay, I guess I could also add their macro functions as well.

Thanks,
Paul