Re: [PATCH 2/3] diff-merges: cleanup set_diff_merges()
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Sep 15, 2022, 20:41 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqq35csmkuq.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <20220914193102.5275-3-sorganov@gmail.com>
Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com> writes:
Show 8 quoted lines
> Get rid of special-casing of 'suppress' in set_diff_merges(). Instead > set 'merges_need_diff' flag correctly in every option handling > function. > > Signed-off-by: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com> > --- > diff-merges.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
Looks OK to me.
Everybody else says set_X() but set_none() has nothing to do ther than calling suppress(), so the change does not really make a functional difference (as you said in the cover letter).
Is the idea that the original value in .merges_need_diff member does not matter because in every case it is set to either 0 or 1? Most cases call common_setup() to set it to 1 like this here...
Show 5 quoted lines
> +static void common_setup(struct rev_info *revs)
> +{
> + suppress(revs);
> + revs->merges_need_diff = 1;
> +}... but this does not touch (in other words, it does not explicitly clear) it, ...
> +static void set_none(struct rev_info *revs)
> +{
> + suppress(revs);
> +}... so we still rely on somebody to set the .merges_need_diff to 0 initially, right?
Show 5 quoted lines
> - > - /* NOTE: the merges_need_diff flag is cleared by func() call */ > - if (func != suppress) > - revs->merges_need_diff = 1; > }
It is very good to see this one go.
Show 6 quoted lines
> /*
> @@ -115,6 +122,7 @@ int diff_merges_parse_opts(struct rev_info *revs, const char **argv)
>
> if (!suppress_m_parsing && !strcmp(arg, "-m")) {
> set_to_default(revs);
> + revs->merges_need_diff = 0;I am wondering how this becomes necessary? Is it because set_to_default() would flip the member to 1 unconditionally, or something? If it weren't for this hunk, the lossage of the previous hunk is a very good clean-up, but if we need to do this, I cannot shake the feeling that we mostly shifted the dirt around, without really cleaning it? I dunno.
Show 6 quoted lines
> @@ -125,7 +133,7 @@ int diff_merges_parse_opts(struct rev_info *revs, const char **argv)
> set_remerge_diff(revs);
> revs->merges_imply_patch = 1;
> } else if (!strcmp(arg, "--no-diff-merges")) {
> - suppress(revs);
> + set_none(revs);We do not need to explicitly set .merges_need_diff to 0 here, presumably because it is initialized to 0 and nobody touched it, right?
Show 12 quoted lines
> } else if (!strcmp(arg, "--combined-all-paths")) {
> revs->combined_all_paths = 1;
> } else if ((argcount = parse_long_opt("diff-merges", argv, &optarg))) {
> @@ -139,7 +147,7 @@ int diff_merges_parse_opts(struct rev_info *revs, const char **argv)
>
> void diff_merges_suppress(struct rev_info *revs)
> {
> - suppress(revs);
> + set_none(revs);
> }
>
> void diff_merges_default_to_first_parent(struct rev_info *revs)