From: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 10:37:53 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] update-index: use enum for untracked cache options
Message-ID: <CAP8UFD3+gsHZuaBweP83or=rEh-LFnz6=ycBCeuhApxp0PzN1A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq1tawlpqw.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 8:11 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
>> ---
>>  builtin/update-index.c | 18 +++++++++++++-----
>>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/builtin/update-index.c b/builtin/update-index.c
>> index 6f6b289..246b3d3 100644
>> --- a/builtin/update-index.c
>> +++ b/builtin/update-index.c
>> @@ -35,6 +35,14 @@ static int mark_skip_worktree_only;
>>  #define UNMARK_FLAG 2
>>  static struct strbuf mtime_dir = STRBUF_INIT;
>>
>> +/* Untracked cache mode */
>> +enum uc_mode {
>> +     UNDEF_UC = -1,
>> +     NO_UC = 0,
>> +     UC,
>> +     FORCE_UC
>> +};
>> +
>
> With these, the code is much easier to read than with the mystery
> constants, but did you consider making UC_ a common prefix for
> further ease-of-reading?  E.g.
>
>     UC_UNSPECIFIED
>     UC_DONTUSE
>     UC_USE
>     UC_FORCE
>
> or something?

Ok, I will use what you suggest.

Thanks,
Christian.