From: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 19:22:26 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 5/7] bisect: simplify the addition of new bisect terms
Message-ID: <CAP8UFD1ofg01R1rEWk3MJweGAQsVc-yrgCH=fjJ_JeU_81yyTA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1435337896-20709-6-git-send-email-Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> wrote:
>
>  static int for_each_bad_bisect_ref(const char *submodule, each_ref_fn fn, void *cb_data)
>  {
> -       return for_each_ref_in_submodule(submodule, "refs/bisect/bad", fn, cb_data);
> +       struct strbuf bisect_refs = STRBUF_INIT;
> +       int status;
> +       strbuf_addf(&bisect_refs, "refs/bisect/%s", name_bad);
> +       status = for_each_ref_in_submodule(submodule, bisect_refs.buf, fn, cb_data);
> +       strbuf_release(&bisect_refs);
> +       return status;
>  }
>
>  static int for_each_good_bisect_ref(const char *submodule, each_ref_fn fn, void *cb_data)
>  {
> -       return for_each_ref_in_submodule(submodule, "refs/bisect/good", fn, cb_data);
> +       struct strbuf bisect_refs = STRBUF_INIT;
> +       int status;
> +       strbuf_addf(&bisect_refs, "refs/bisect/%s", name_good);
> +       status = for_each_ref_in_submodule(submodule, bisect_refs.buf, fn, cb_data);
> +       strbuf_release(&bisect_refs);
> +       return status;
>  }

I wonder if it would not be better to just have:

static int for_each_bisect_ref(const char *submodule, each_ref_fn fn,
const char *term, void *cb_data)
{
      struct strbuf bisect_refs = STRBUF_INIT;
      int status;
      strbuf_addf(&bisect_refs, "refs/bisect/%s", term);
      status = for_each_ref_in_submodule(submodule, bisect_refs.buf,
fn, cb_data);
      strbuf_release(&bisect_refs);
      return status;
}

This way it can be used with either name_good, name_bad or "skip" as
the term argument.