From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 07:07:06 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] bisect--helper: use OPT_CMDMODE instead of OPT_BOOL
Message-ID: <CAPig+cQM2tyXWek7cMZkfks1SA4MHcf9yvfJ1SRZ2-mRf1Q47g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1463031127-17718-2-git-send-email-pranit.bauva@gmail.com>

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 1:32 AM, Pranit Bauva <pranit.bauva@gmail.com> wrote:
> `--next-all` is meant to be used as a subcommand to support multiple
> "operation mode" though the current implementation does not contain any
> other subcommand along side with `--next-all` but further commits will
> include some more subcommands.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pranit Bauva <pranit.bauva@gmail.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/builtin/bisect--helper.c b/builtin/bisect--helper.c
> @@ -23,9 +23,14 @@ int cmd_bisect__helper(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> -       if (!next_all)
> +       if (!cmdmode)
>                 usage_with_options(git_bisect_helper_usage, options);
>
> -       /* next-all */
> -       return bisect_next_all(prefix, no_checkout);
> +       switch (cmdmode) {
> +       case NEXT_ALL:
> +               return bisect_next_all(prefix, no_checkout);
> +       default:
> +               die("BUG: unknown subcommand '%d'", cmdmode);
> +       }
> +       return 0;

What happens if you remove this useless 'return 0'? Does the (or some)
compiler incorrectly complain about it falling off the end of the
function without returning a value?

>  }