Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] rewrite git_config() to use the config-set API

Tanay Abhra [off-list ref] writes:

+struct config_set_element {
+	struct hashmap_entry ent;
+	char *key;
+	struct string_list value_list;
+};
+
+struct configset_list_item {
+	struct config_set_element *e;
+	int value_index;
+};

I originally wondered why you had two levels of pointers, but
config_set_element is not new, just moved. It's OK.

+/*
+ * the contents of the list are ordered according to their
+ * position in the config files and order of parsing the files.
+ * (i.e. key-value pair at the last position of .git/config will
+ * be at the last item of the list)
+ */
+
+struct configset_list {

I wouldn't put a blank line between comment and decl if the comment
applies to the decl.

-int git_config(config_fn_t fn, void *data)
+static int git_config_raw(config_fn_t fn, void *data)
 {
 	return git_config_with_options(fn, data, NULL, 1);
 }

I would have done this and the new git_config() as a separate patch, but
I do not mind strongly.

The "if" is already in ALLOC_GROW.

+		ALLOC_GROW(cs->list.items, cs->list.nr + 20, cs->list.alloc);

The 20 should be just 1 I guess. You're adding 1 element, and ALLOC_GROW
will take care of allocating more than 1 for you (see alloc_nr and
ALLOC_GROW's defs in cache.h).

Doesn't this change belong to PATCH 2/6 ?

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/

On 7/25/2014 7:28 PM, Matthieu Moy wrote:

Tanay Abhra [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

+struct config_set_element {
+	struct hashmap_entry ent;
+	char *key;
+	struct string_list value_list;
+};
+
+struct configset_list_item {
+	struct config_set_element *e;
+	int value_index;
+};

I originally wondered why you had two levels of pointers, but
config_set_element is not new, just moved. It's OK.

quoted

+/*
+ * the contents of the list are ordered according to their
+ * position in the config files and order of parsing the files.
+ * (i.e. key-value pair at the last position of .git/config will
+ * be at the last item of the list)
+ */
+
+struct configset_list {

I wouldn't put a blank line between comment and decl if the comment
applies to the decl.

Noted.

quoted

-int git_config(config_fn_t fn, void *data)
+static int git_config_raw(config_fn_t fn, void *data)
 {
 	return git_config_with_options(fn, data, NULL, 1);
 }

I would have done this and the new git_config() as a separate patch, but
I do not mind strongly.

quoted

 static struct config_set_element *configset_find_element(struct config_set *cs, const char *key)
 {
 	struct config_set_element k;

@@ -1268,6 +1295,7 @@ static int configset_add_value(struct config_set *cs, const char *key, const cha
 {
 	struct config_set_element *e;
 	struct string_list_item *si;
+	struct configset_list_item *l_item;
 	struct key_value_info *kv_info = xmalloc(sizeof(*kv_info));
 
 	e = configset_find_element(cs, key);

@@ -1283,6 +1311,13 @@ static int configset_add_value(struct config_set *cs, const char *key, const cha
 		hashmap_add(&cs->config_hash, e);
 	}
 	si = string_list_append_nodup(&e->value_list, value ? xstrdup(value) : NULL);
+
+	if (cs->list.nr + 1 > cs->list.alloc)

The "if" is already in ALLOC_GROW.

quoted

+		ALLOC_GROW(cs->list.items, cs->list.nr + 20, cs->list.alloc);

The 20 should be just 1 I guess. You're adding 1 element, and ALLOC_GROW
will take care of allocating more than 1 for you (see alloc_nr and
ALLOC_GROW's defs in cache.h).

Oh, you are are right, I thought alloc grew by one, not by a factor.

quoted

@@ -1318,10 +1356,14 @@ void git_configset_clear(struct config_set *cs)
 	hashmap_iter_init(&cs->config_hash, &iter);
 	while ((entry = hashmap_iter_next(&iter))) {
 		free(entry->key);
-		string_list_clear(&entry->value_list, 0);
+		string_list_clear(&entry->value_list, 1);

Doesn't this change belong to PATCH 2/6 ?

Yup, you are right again.
Thanks.