Re: [PATCH v13 02/15] path.c: refactor relative_path(), not only strip prefix
- From
Jiang Xin <worldhello.net@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 26, 2013, 00:21 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CANYiYbGiAdMtOwdAf1cgV74cJjaM1dABTE6LEe+LAWoEaUBSXw@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <519C7CA1.2060402@alum.mit.edu>
2013/5/22 Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>:
> Sorry for coming late to the party.
I am on a business travel, and respond late also. ;-)
Show 21 quoted lines
> > On 05/22/2013 03:40 AM, Jiang Xin wrote: >> Different results for relative_path() before and after this refactor: >> >> abs path base path relative (original) relative (refactor) >> ======== ========= =================== =================== >> /a/b/c/ /a/b c/ c/ >> /a/b//c/ //a///b/ c/ c/ >> /a/b /a/b . ./ >> /a/b/ /a/b . ./ >> /a /a/b/ /a ../ >> / /a/b/ / ../../ >> /a/c /a/b/ /a/c ../c >> /a/b (empty) /a/b /a/b >> /a/b (null) /a/b /a/b >> (empty) /a/b (empty) ./ >> (null) (empty) (null) ./ >> (null) /a/b (segfault) ./ > > The old and new versions both seem to be (differently) inconsistent > about when the output has a trailing slash. What is the rule?
The reason for introducing patch 02/15 is that we don't want to reinvent the wheel. Patch 06/15 (git-clean: refactor git-clean into two phases) needs to save relative_path of each git-clean candidate file/directory in del_list, but the public method in path.c (i.e. relative_path) is not powerful, and static method in quote.c (i.e. path_relative) can note be used directly. One way is to enhanced relative_path in path.c, like this patch.
Since we combine the two methods (relative_path in path.c and path_relative in quote.c), the new relative_path must be compatible with the original two methods.
relative_path in path.c =======================
relative_path is called in one place:
if (getenv(GIT_WORK_TREE_ENVIRONMENT))
setenv(GIT_WORK_TREE_ENVIRONMENT, ".", 1); set_git_dir(relative_path(git_dir, work_tree));
initialized = 1;and set_git_dir only set the environment GIT_DIR_ENVIRONMENT like this:
int set_git_dir(const char *path)
{
if (setenv(GIT_DIR_ENVIRONMENT, path, 1))
return error("Could not set GIT_DIR to '%s'", path);
setup_git_env();
return 0;
}So the only restraint for relative_path is that the return value can not be blank. If the abs and base arguments for relative_path are the same, the return value should be "." ("./" is also OK), then set the envionment GIT_DIR_ENVIRONMENT to "." (or "./").
path_relative in quote.c ========================
We can not simply move "path_relative" in quote.c to "relative_path" in path.c directly. It is because:
* The arguments for "relative_path" are from user input. So must validate (remove duplicate slash) before use. But "path_relative" does not check duplicate slash in arguments.
* "path_relative" will return blank string, if abs and base are the same.
Also I noticed that "quote_path_relative" of quote.c (which calls path_relative) will transform the blank string from path_relative to "./" (not ".")
char *quote_path_relative(const char *in, int len,
...
const char *rel = path_relative(in, len, &sb, prefix, -1);
...
if (!out->len)
strbuf_addstr(out, "./");That's why the "path_relative" in path.c refactor the output of "." into "./".
Show 23 quoted lines
> >> diff --git a/path.c b/path.c >> index 04ff..0174d 100644 >> --- a/path.c >> +++ b/path.c >> @@ -441,42 +441,104 @@ int adjust_shared_perm(const char *path) >> return 0; >> } >> >> -const char *relative_path(const char *abs, const char *base) >> +/* >> + * Give path as relative to prefix. >> + * >> + * The strbuf may or may not be used, so do not assume it contains the >> + * returned path. >> + */ >> +const char *relative_path(const char *abs, const char *base, >> + struct strbuf *sb) > > Thanks for adding documentation. But I think it could be improved: > > * The comment refers to "path" and "prefix" but the function parameters > are "abs" and "base". I suggest making them agree.
Yes, it will be nice to update the comments.
Show 16 quoted lines
> * Who owns the memory pointed to by the return value? > > * The comment says that "the strbuf may or may not be used". So why is > it part of the interface? (I suppose it is because the strbuf might be > given ownership of the returned memory if it has to be allocated.) > Would it be more straightforward to *always* return the result in the > strbuf? > > * Please document when the return value contains a trailing slash and > also that superfluous internal slashes are (apparently) normalized away. > > * Leading double-slashes have a special meaning on some operating > systems. The old and new versions of this function both seem to ignore > differences between initial slashes. Perhaps somebody who knows the > rules better could say whether this is an issue but I guess the problem > would rarely be encountered in practice.
See Junio's reply.
Show 7 quoted lines
> > Michael > > -- > Michael Haggerty > mhagger@alum.mit.edu > http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/
-- 蒋鑫 北京群英汇信息技术有限公司 邮件: worldhello.net@gmail.com 网址: http://www.ossxp.com/ 博客: http://www.worldhello.net/ 微博: http://weibo.com/gotgit/ 电话: 18601196889