Thread (34 messages) flat view 34 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15

Re: [PATCH v2 10/11] ref-filter: introduce contents_atom_parser()

From: Eric Sunshine <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:07:30

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Karthik Nayak [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Introduce contents_atom_parser() which will parse the '%(contents)'
atom and store information into the 'used_atom' structure based on the
modifiers used along with the atom.

Helped-by: Ramsay Jones [off-list ref]
Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <redacted>
---
diff --git a/ref-filter.c b/ref-filter.c
@@ -39,6 +39,10 @@ static struct used_atom {
                struct align align;
                enum { RR_SHORTEN, RR_TRACK, RR_TRACKSHORT, RR_NORMAL }
                        remote_ref;
+               struct {
+                       enum { C_BARE, C_BODY, C_BODY_DEP, C_LINES, C_SIG, C_SUB } option;
+                       unsigned int no_lines;
'no_lines' sounds like "no lines!". How about 'nlines' instead?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+               } contents;
        } u;
 } *used_atom;
 static int used_atom_cnt, need_tagged, need_symref;
@@ -90,6 +94,36 @@ static void remote_ref_atom_parser(struct used_atom *atom)
+static void contents_atom_parser(struct used_atom *atom)
+{
+       const char * buf;
+
+       if (match_atom_name(atom->str, "contents", &buf))
+               atom->u.contents.option = C_BARE;
+       else if (match_atom_name(atom->str, "subject", &buf)) {
The original code used strcmp() and matched only "subject", however
the new code will incorrectly match both "subject" and
"subject:whatever". Therefore, you should be using strcmp() here
rather than match_atom_name().

Ditto for "body".
+               atom->u.contents.option = C_SUB;
+               return;
+       } else if (match_atom_name(atom->str, "body", &buf)) {
+               atom->u.contents.option = C_BODY_DEP;
+               return;
+       }
+       if (!buf)
+               return;
It's not easy to see that this 'if (!buf)' check relates to the
"contents" check at the very top of the if/else if/ chain since there
are entirely unrelated checks in between. Reorganizing it can improve
clarity:

    if (!strcmp("subject")) {
        ...
        return;
    } else if (!strcmp("body")) {
        ...
        return;
    } else if (!match_atom_name(...,"contents", &buf))
        die("BUG: expected 'contents' or 'contents:'");

    if (!buf) {
        atom->u.contents.option = C_BARE;
        return;
    }
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+       if (!strcmp(buf, "body"))
+               atom->u.contents.option = C_BODY;
+       else if (!strcmp(buf, "signature"))
+               atom->u.contents.option = C_SIG;
+       else if (!strcmp(buf, "subject"))
+               atom->u.contents.option = C_SUB;
+       else if (skip_prefix(buf, "lines=", &buf)) {
+               atom->u.contents.option = C_LINES;
+               if (strtoul_ui(buf, 10, &atom->u.contents.no_lines))
+                       die(_("positive value expected contents:lines=%s"), buf);
+       } else
+               die(_("unrecognized %%(contents) argument: %s"), buf);
+}
@@ -777,28 +801,23 @@ static void grab_sub_body_contents(struct atom_value *val, int deref, struct obj
                                    &bodypos, &bodylen, &nonsiglen,
                                    &sigpos, &siglen);

-               if (!strcmp(name, "subject"))
+               if (atom->u.contents.option == C_SUB)
                        v->s = copy_subject(subpos, sublen);
-               else if (!strcmp(name, "contents:subject"))
-                       v->s = copy_subject(subpos, sublen);
-               else if (!strcmp(name, "body"))
+               else if (atom->u.contents.option == C_BODY_DEP)
                        v->s = xmemdupz(bodypos, bodylen);
-               else if (!strcmp(name, "contents:body"))
+               else if (atom->u.contents.option == C_BODY)
                        v->s = xmemdupz(bodypos, nonsiglen);
-               else if (!strcmp(name, "contents:signature"))
+               else if (atom->u.contents.option == C_SIG)
                        v->s = xmemdupz(sigpos, siglen);
-               else if (!strcmp(name, "contents"))
-                       v->s = xstrdup(subpos);
-               else if (skip_prefix(name, "contents:lines=", &valp)) {
+               else if (atom->u.contents.option == C_LINES) {
                        struct strbuf s = STRBUF_INIT;
                        const char *contents_end = bodylen + bodypos - siglen;

-                       if (strtoul_ui(valp, 10, &v->u.contents.lines))
-                               die(_("positive value expected contents:lines=%s"), valp);
                        /*  Size is the length of the message after removing the signature */
-                       append_lines(&s, subpos, contents_end - subpos, v->u.contents.lines);
+                       append_lines(&s, subpos, contents_end - subpos, atom->u.contents.no_lines);
                        v->s = strbuf_detach(&s, NULL);
-               }
+               } else if (atom->u.contents.option == C_BARE)
+                       v->s = xstrdup(subpos);
        }
 }

--
2.6.4
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help