Re: [PATCH 3/7] submodule-config: keep labels around

From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Date: May 11, 2016, 21:39 UTC
Message-ID: <CAGZ79kYfNyyLvhZKbmKNZV=2nR00HDEQcD_knPLo3OHRJY+yfg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqfutojnd3.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

+Heiko

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 25 quoted lines

> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> @@ -199,6 +203,7 @@ static struct submodule *lookup_or_create_by_name(struct submodule_cache *cache,
>>>>       submodule->update_strategy.command = NULL;
>>>>       submodule->fetch_recurse = RECURSE_SUBMODULES_NONE;
>>>>       submodule->ignore = NULL;
>>>> +     submodule->labels = NULL;
>>>
>>> Hmph, is there a reason to do this, instead of embedding an instance
>>> of "struct string_list" inside submodule structure?
>>>
>>> I am not yet claiming that embedding is better.  Just wondering if
>>> it makes it easier to handle initialization as seen in the hunk
>>> below, and also _clear() procedure.
>>
>> Thanks for pointing out that alternative.  That looks so much
>> better in this patch. Let's see how the follow up patches develop.
>> As we'd not check != NULL first, but check against the count of the
>> string list. (I expect no problems down that road though).
>
> I also wonder if we can say the same for the .ignore field, by the
> way, if we agree that it is a better direction to go.

I don't think this is a good idea, as it's just a string, like .{url, name, path}

Instead of storing the string we could store an enum {UNTRACKED, DIRTY, ALL, NONE, NOT_INIT} though. That would be better I guess.