Thread (45 messages) flat view 45 messages, 3 authors, 2016-06-15

Re: [PATCH/WIP v3 06/31] am: detect mbox patches

From: Johannes Schindelin <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:05:29

Hi Paul,

On 2015-06-18 13:25, Paul Tan wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/builtin/am.c b/builtin/am.c
index e9a3687..7b97ea8 100644
--- a/builtin/am.c
+++ b/builtin/am.c
@@ -121,6 +121,96 @@ static void am_destroy(const struct am_state *state)
 	strbuf_release(&sb);
 }
 
+/*
+ * Returns 1 if the file looks like a piece of email a-la RFC2822, 0 otherwise.
+ * We check this by grabbing all the non-indented lines and seeing if they look
+ * like they begin with valid header field names.
+ */
+static int is_email(const char *filename)
+{
+	struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
+	FILE *fp = xfopen(filename, "r");
+	int ret = 1;
+
+	while (!strbuf_getline(&sb, fp, '\n')) {
+		const char *x;
+
+		strbuf_rtrim(&sb);
+
+		if (!sb.len)
+			break; /* End of header */
+
+		/* Ignore indented folded lines */
+		if (*sb.buf == '\t' || *sb.buf == ' ')
+			continue;
+
+		/* It's a header if it matches the regexp "^[!-9;-~]+:" */
Why not just compile a regex and use it here? We use regexes elsewhere anyway...
+/**
+ * Attempts to detect the patch_format of the patches contained in `paths`,
+ * returning the PATCH_FORMAT_* enum value. Returns PATCH_FORMAT_UNKNOWN if
+ * detection fails.
+ */
+static int detect_patch_format(struct string_list *paths)
+{
+	enum patch_format ret = PATCH_FORMAT_UNKNOWN;
+	struct strbuf l1 = STRBUF_INIT;
+	struct strbuf l2 = STRBUF_INIT;
+	struct strbuf l3 = STRBUF_INIT;
+	FILE *fp;
+
+	/*
+	 * We default to mbox format if input is from stdin and for directories
+	 */
+	if (!paths->nr || !strcmp(paths->items->string, "-") ||
+	    is_directory(paths->items->string)) {
+		ret = PATCH_FORMAT_MBOX;
+		goto done;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * Otherwise, check the first 3 lines of the first patch, starting
+	 * from the first non-blank line, to try to detect its format.
+	 */
+	fp = xfopen(paths->items->string, "r");
+	while (!strbuf_getline(&l1, fp, '\n')) {
+		strbuf_trim(&l1);
+		if (l1.len)
+			break;
+	}
+	strbuf_getline(&l2, fp, '\n');
We should test the return value of `strbuf_getline()`; if EOF was reached already, `strbuf_getwholeline()` does not touch the strbuf. I know, the strbuf is still initialized empty here, but it is too easy to forget when changing this code.
+	strbuf_trim(&l2);
+	strbuf_getline(&l3, fp, '\n');
+	strbuf_trim(&l3);
+	fclose(fp);
+
+	if (starts_with(l1.buf, "From ") || starts_with(l1.buf, "From: "))
+		ret = PATCH_FORMAT_MBOX;
Hmm. We can test that earlier and return without reading from the file any further, I think.
+	else if (l1.len && l2.len && l3.len && is_email(paths->items->string))
+		ret = PATCH_FORMAT_MBOX;
Maybe we can do better than this by folding the `is_email() function into this here function, reusing the same strbuf to read the lines and keeping track of the email header lines we saw... I would really like to avoid opening the same file twice just to figure out whether it is in email format.

The rest looks very nice!
Dscho
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help