Re: [PATCH v2 11/13] color: add color_parse_gently()
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Feb 23, 2026, 05:03 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqldgkoxve.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <8fae2d15-cb0d-4ccb-8cd3-c4775b6666dd@gmail.com>
Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> writes:
Show 6 quoted lines
>> Do you mean that this error() call is not die(), the flag does not >> fit the usual "gently" criteria? In other words, should we make >> this call die() if we call it "gently"? > > This is an interesting case where the existing color parsing logic is > not following the typical pattern that uses die() on a failed parse.
I see. I personally would view that an existing bug worth fixing, but I ...
> If we want to change the behavior to die() later, then that could be > considered, though I don't want to consider the ramifications right now.
... agree with you that it should be fixed outside the scope of this topic.
> I think the easiest "local" fix is to use the 'quiet' way, though it adds > some asymmetry in the config code in how it uses the 'gently' parameter.
Or, just add comments to the function that takes gently but does not die() to warn those who would add new callers. They can pass gently=1 if they want to handle the errors themselves and keep it that way. If they want the function to die, well they have to wait until the function is fixed to behave like everybody else.