Re: [PATCH 4/4] trace2: remove unneeded calls to generate 'def_param' set
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Mar 6, 2024, 21:57 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqwmqfowfo.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <ZejkVOVQBZhLVfHW@google.com>
Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com> writes:
Show 50 quoted lines
> On 2024.03.04 15:40, Jeff Hostetler via GitGitGadget wrote:
>> From: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhostetler@github.com>
>>
>> Now that "trace2_cmd_name()" implicitly calls "trace2_cmd_list_config()"
>> and "trace2_cmd_list_env_vars()", we don't need to explicitly call them.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhostetler@github.com>
>> ---
>> git.c | 6 ------
>> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/git.c b/git.c
>> index 7068a184b0a..a769d72ab8f 100644
>> --- a/git.c
>> +++ b/git.c
>> @@ -373,8 +373,6 @@ static int handle_alias(int *argcp, const char ***argv)
>> strvec_pushv(&child.args, (*argv) + 1);
>>
>> trace2_cmd_alias(alias_command, child.args.v);
>> - trace2_cmd_list_config();
>> - trace2_cmd_list_env_vars();
>> trace2_cmd_name("_run_shell_alias_");
>>
>> ret = run_command(&child);
>> @@ -411,8 +409,6 @@ static int handle_alias(int *argcp, const char ***argv)
>> COPY_ARRAY(new_argv + count, *argv + 1, *argcp);
>>
>> trace2_cmd_alias(alias_command, new_argv);
>> - trace2_cmd_list_config();
>> - trace2_cmd_list_env_vars();
>>
>> *argv = new_argv;
>> *argcp += count - 1;
>> @@ -462,8 +458,6 @@ static int run_builtin(struct cmd_struct *p, int argc, const char **argv)
>>
>> trace_argv_printf(argv, "trace: built-in: git");
>> trace2_cmd_name(p->cmd);
>> - trace2_cmd_list_config();
>> - trace2_cmd_list_env_vars();
>>
>> validate_cache_entries(the_repository->index);
>> status = p->fn(argc, argv, prefix);
>> --
>> gitgitgadget
>>
>
> I'd personally prefer to see this squashed into Patch 3, but I don't
> feel too strongly about it. Either way, the series LGTM.
>
> Reviewed-by: Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>Let's see what JeffH says about this. I agree with you that making some stuff redundant in [Patch 3/4] and fixing the redundancy in this step does feel somewhat roundabout way of doing this.
Thanks.