Re: [PATCH 04/18] Offer a function to demote fsck errors to warnings

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Dec 22, 2014, 23:15 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqlhlz6zti.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.1412222348040.21312@s15462909.onlinehome-server.info>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

Show 12 quoted lines

> For example, try to spot the error here:
>
> 	...
> 	F(ALMOST_HAPPY, INFO) \
> 	F(CANNOT_RECOVER, ERROR) \
> 	F(COFFEE_IS_EMPTY, WARN) \
> 	F(JUST_BEING_CHATTY, INFO) \
> 	F(LIFE_IS_GOOD, INFO) \
> 	F(MISSING_SOMETHING_VITAL, FATAL_ERROR) \
> 	F(NEED_TO_SLEEP, WARN) \
> 	F(SOMETHING_WENT_WRONG, ERROR) \
> 	...

But that is not what is being suggested at all. I already said that FIRST_SOMETHING is fine as a measure to initialize, didn't I?

I am only saying that if you have a place to store customized level, you should initialize that part with default levels and always look it up from that place at runtime. It is perfectly fine for the initialization step to take advantage of the ordering and FIRST_SOMETHING constants.