Re: [PATCH v2 03/17] update-index: read --index-info with strbuf_getline_crlf()
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jan 4, 2016, 19:50 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqio39nmye.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.DEB.2.20.1601041308310.14434@virtualbox>
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
Show 19 quoted lines
>> diff --git a/builtin/update-index.c b/builtin/update-index.c
>> index 7431938..a7a9a7e 100644
>> --- a/builtin/update-index.c
>> +++ b/builtin/update-index.c
>> @@ -473,7 +473,9 @@ static void read_index_info(int line_termination)
>> struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
>> struct strbuf uq = STRBUF_INIT;
>>
>> - while (strbuf_getline(&buf, stdin, line_termination) != EOF) {
>> + while ((line_termination
>> + ? strbuf_getline_crlf(&buf, stdin)
>> + : strbuf_getline(&buf, stdin, '\0')) != EOF) {
>> char *ptr, *tab;
>
> This is a problematic change because it does not safeguard for future
> introduction of a line_termination value other than LF or NUL. I believe
> the safest would be to change read_index_info() to take a `nul_delimited`
> parameter instead of the `line_termination` parameter first, and then
> introduce that change to use strbuf_getline_crlf if !nul_delimited.When I introduced line_termination long time ago, I wrote these codepaths anticipating that there might be a value other than NUL and LF that could be useful, but no useful caller that uses other useful value has emerged, so I agree that the interface was too broad and general for its own good.
I agree with your comments for all the changes in this series that switch between getline and getline_delim('\0') based on the value of line_termination; its generality is useless and we should declare "the line termination is either NUL or LF, no other choices"; using nul_delimited = 0/1 is a very good way to express it clearly.
Thanks.