Re: [PATCH 2/8] revert: decouple sequencer actions from builtin commands

Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:

Fine;  I'm sold on the string idea.  Also, I figured it would be
easier to explain the changes if I change this enum to a string -- I
should probably use "ease of explaining changes" as a stronger
criterion in the future when I have two competing implementations in
mind.

I wrote that too quickly.  I can't stand seeing so many strcmp() calls
all over my codebase -- look at the number of instances of matching
opts->command to REPLAY_CMD_*.  Why should I have to use strcmp() when
the data is semantic?  It makes no sense: by spelling out the string
in so many places, I'm just making the code more error-prone, because
the compiler can't warn me if I make a spelling mistake in one place.
Why do you like the string so much?  A new caller will have to
register new actions in the replay_actions enum and modify the
codebase to define a codepath for its specific case anyway: so I don't
mind it registering a new command in replay_command.

-- Ram