Re: [PATCH/WIP 6/8] am: extract patch, message and authorship with git-mailinfo
flat view
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:05:01
Paul Tan [off-list ref] writes:
quoted hunk
@@ -17,6 +34,10 @@ struct am_state { struct strbuf dir; /* state directory path */ int cur; /* current patch number */ int last; /* last patch number */ + struct strbuf msg; /* commit message */ + struct strbuf author_name; /* commit author's name */ + struct strbuf author_email; /* commit author's email */ + struct strbuf author_date; /* commit author's date */ int prec; /* number of digits in patch filename */ };
I always get suspicious when structure fields are overly commented, wondering if it is a sign of naming fields poorly. All of the above fields look quite self-explanatory and I am not sure if it is worth having these comments, spending efforts to type SP many times to align them and all. By the way, the overall structure of the series look sensible.
quoted hunk
+static int read_author_script(struct am_state *state) +{ + char *value; + struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT; + const char *filename = am_path(state, "author-script"); + FILE *fp = fopen(filename, "r"); + if (!fp) { + if (errno == ENOENT) + return 0; + die(_("could not open '%s' for reading"), filename);
Hmph, do we want to report with die_errno()?
quoted hunk
+ } + + if (strbuf_getline(&sb, fp, '\n')) + return -1; + if (!skip_prefix(sb.buf, "GIT_AUTHOR_NAME=", (const char**) &value))
This cast is unfortunate; can't "value" be of "const char *" type?