Re: [RFC/PATCH V2] branch.c: replace git_config with git_config_get_string

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 4:09 AM, Tanay Abhra [off-list ref] wrote:

On 6/25/2014 10:15 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Tanay Abhra [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

diff --git a/branch.c b/branch.c
index 660097b..c9a2a0d 100644
--- a/branch.c
+++ b/branch.c

@@ -140,33 +140,25 @@ static int setup_tracking(const char *new_ref, const char *orig_ref,
 int read_branch_desc(struct strbuf *buf, const char *branch_name)
 {
-       struct branch_desc_cb cb;
+       const char *value = NULL;
+       struct branch_desc desc;
        struct strbuf name = STRBUF_INIT;
        strbuf_addf(&name, "branch.%s.description", branch_name);
-       cb.config_name = name.buf;
-       cb.value = NULL;
-       if (git_config(read_branch_desc_cb, &cb) < 0) {
+       desc.config_name = name.buf;
+       desc.value = NULL;
+       git_config_get_string(desc.config_name, &value);
+       if (git_config_string(&desc.value, desc.config_name, value) < 0) {

Although it works in this case, it's somewhat ugly that you ignore the
return value of git_config_get_string(), and a person reading the code
has to spend extra time digging into git_config_string() to figure out
why this is safe. If might be clearer for future readers by rephrasing
like this:

    if (git_config_get_string(desc.config_name, &value) < 0 ||
        git_config_string(&desc.value, desc.config_name, value) < 0) {

Noted, also didn't the old code leak desc.value as it was xstrduped
by git_config_string()? Thanks for the review.

Looks that way.