From: Junio C Hamano Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 20:40:59 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 39/83] builtin/apply: move 'ws_error_action' into 'struct apply_state' Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Junio C Hamano writes: > As I do not expect that cmd_apply() which is a moral equivalent of > main() will stay to be the only one who wants to see a reasonably > initialized apply_state(), I think the patch that introduced the > very first version of "struct apply_state" should also introduce a > helper function to initialize it, i.e. > > static void init_apply_state(struct apply_state *s, > const char *prefix) > { > memset(s, '\0', sizeof(*s)); > s->prefix = prefix; > s->prefix_length = s->prefix ? strlen(s->prefix) : 0; > } > > in [PATCH 7/xx]. Just to avoid misunderstanding, I do not mean to say that the init-apply-state helper that should have been introduced in 07/xx would gain a new caller-supplied parameter ws_error_action. This step would have a patch to the function that does something like: static void init_apply_state(struct apply_state *s, const char *prefix) { memset(s, '\0', sizeof(*s)); s->prefix = prefix; s->prefix_length = s->prefix ? strlen(s->prefix) : 0; ... + s->ws_error_action = warn_on_ws_error; } without having the caller supply what error_action should the state be initialized with.