From: Pranit Bauva <pranit.bauva@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 09:14:04 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 08/27] bisect--helper: `is_expected_rev` & `check_expected_revs` shell function in C
Message-ID: <CAFZEwPP2j-+C=J-hiWEiW4wa=Yso27-M-QUABCTyd4WYieeezw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqlgzlolwa.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

Hey Junio,

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 3:43 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Pranit Bauva <pranit.bauva@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> +static int is_expected_rev(const char *expected_hex)
>> +{
>> +     struct strbuf actual_hex = STRBUF_INIT;
>> +     int res = 0;
>> +     if (strbuf_read_file(&actual_hex, git_path_bisect_expected_rev(), 0) >= 0) {
>> +             strbuf_trim(&actual_hex);
>> +             res = !strcmp(actual_hex.buf, expected_hex);
>
> If it is known to have 40-hex:
>
>  (1) accepting ">= 0" seems way too lenient.  You only expect a
>      41-byte file (or 42 if somebody would write CRLF, but I do not
>      think anybody other than yourself is expected to write into
>      this file, and you do not write CRLF yourself);
>
>  (2) strbuf_trim() is overly loose.  You only want to trim the
>      terimnating LF and it is an error to have other trailing
>      whitespaces.
>
> I think the latter is not a new problem and it is OK to leave it
> as-is; limiting (1) to >= 40 may still be a good change, though,
> because it makes the intention of the code clearer.

I can do the first change. Since this wasn't present in the shell
code, I will also mention it in the commit message.

Regards,
Pranit Bauva