Re: [PATCH] parse-options.c:parse_options_check() change OPTION_NUMBER to OPTION_CMDMODE

> Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:
>
>> On 02/28/2014 10:07 AM, Sun He wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Sun He <sunheehnus@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>  parse-options.c | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/parse-options.c b/parse-options.c
>>> index 7b8d3fa..59a52b0 100644
>>> --- a/parse-options.c
>>> +++ b/parse-options.c
>>> @@ -371,7 +371,7 @@ static void parse_options_check(const struct option *opts)
>>>              case OPTION_NEGBIT:
>>>              case OPTION_SET_INT:
>>>              case OPTION_SET_PTR:
>>> -            case OPTION_NUMBER:
>>> +            case OPTION_CMDMODE:
>>>                      if ((opts->flags & PARSE_OPT_OPTARG) ||
>>>                          !(opts->flags & PARSE_OPT_NOARG))
>>>                              err |= optbug(opts, "should not accept an argument");
>>>
>>> --
>>> 1.9.0.138.g2de3478.dirty
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>> When I was reading code yesterday, I came across this protential bug.
>>> parse-options.h says that OPTION_CMDMODE is an option with no arguments and OPTION_NUMBER is special type option.
>
> Please, no overlong line in the text part that makes things
> unnecessarily hard to read.
>
> I agree with all the comments in the message I am responding to.
>

>> BTW, none of my comments should be taken to indicate whether the commit
>> itself makes sense or not.  I haven't checked that far.
>
> While I think it is sensible to make sure CMDMODE is not marked to
> allow arguments, I do not understand why "special type" would imply
> "it is allowed to be marked to take an argument".  Why is it a
> good change to remove "case OPTION_NUMBER:" here?