From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2015 19:18:51 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 1/3] submodule: Reimplement `module_list` shell function in C
Message-ID: <CAGZ79kb5_VJwJoBpvUdVMC43qvJThKa1utQFO68HjM1sciZ6-w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqio7rjppv.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> It is customary to use X_alloc, X_nr for an array X_something that
> is managed by ALLOC_GROW(), I think.  I'd also suggest wrapping
> these in a struct and passing it between module_list_compute() and
> its callers.

I did not take the suggestion as a strong suggestion at the time, but the
looking at resulting squash proposal it looks way better.

> I may have said this already, but unlike tree entries, the index
> entries will never be a directory.  S_ISDIR() check here is
> meaningless [*1*].

Right. I was too focused on the other bug, of checking S_ISGITLINK after
the pathspec matching, that I overlooked the ISDIR again. :(

>> +int cmd_submodule__helper(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>> +{
>> +     int i;
>> +     if (argc < 2)
>> +             die(_("fatal: submodule--helper subcommand must be "
>> +                   "called with a subcommand"));
>> +
>> +     for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(commands); i++)
>> +             if (!strcmp(argv[1], commands[i].cmd))
>> +                     return commands[i].fn(argc - 1, argv + 1, prefix);
>> +
>> +     die(_("fatal: '%s' is not a valid submodule--helper "
>> +           "subcommand"), argv[1]);
>> +}
>
> Nice and clean code structure.  I like it ;-).

It took a good while of discussion and reviews to arrive at
that structure eventually.

The squash proposal looks good to me.