Re: [PATCH v12 13/13] bisect--helper: `bisect_start` shell function partially in C
From: Christian Couder <hidden>
Date: 2016-08-13 07:34:09
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Pranit Bauva [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -431,6 +434,244 @@ static int bisect_terms(struct bisect_terms *terms, const char **argv, int argc) return 0; } +static int bisect_start(struct bisect_terms *terms, int no_checkout, + const char **argv, int argc) +{ + int i, has_double_dash = 0, must_write_terms = 0, bad_seen = 0; + int flags, pathspec_pos; + struct string_list revs = STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP; + struct string_list states = STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP; + struct strbuf start_head = STRBUF_INIT; + struct strbuf bisect_names = STRBUF_INIT; + struct strbuf orig_args = STRBUF_INIT; + const char *head; + unsigned char sha1[20]; + FILE *fp; + struct object_id oid; + + if (is_bare_repository()) + no_checkout = 1; + + for (i = 0; i < argc; i++) { + char *commit_id = xstrfmt("%s^{commit}", argv[i]); + if (!strcmp(argv[i], "--")) { + has_double_dash = 1; + break; + }
In the shell code there is a loop dedicated to checking if there is a double dash in the arguments before the real argument parsing loop. There is a reason for that. If you do it in the same loop, has_double_dash will not be set when the arguments that are before the double dash will be parsed.
+ else if (!strcmp(argv[i], "--no-checkout"))
+ no_checkout = 1;
+ else if (!strcmp(argv[i], "--term-good") ||
+ !strcmp(argv[i], "--term-old")) {
+ must_write_terms = 1;
+ strbuf_reset(&terms->term_good);
+ strbuf_addstr(&terms->term_good, argv[++i]);
+ }
+ else if (skip_prefix(argv[i], "--term-good=", &argv[i])) {
(Maybe you could put the "else if (...) {" on the same line as the "}" above.)
+ must_write_terms = 1;
+ strbuf_reset(&terms->term_good);
+ strbuf_addstr(&terms->term_good, argv[i]);
+ }
+ else if (skip_prefix(argv[i], "--term-old=", &argv[i])) {
+ must_write_terms = 1;
+ strbuf_reset(&terms->term_good);
+ strbuf_addstr(&terms->term_good, argv[i]);
+ }
+ else if (!strcmp(argv[i], "--term-bad") ||
+ !strcmp(argv[i], "--term-new")) {
+ must_write_terms = 1;
+ strbuf_reset(&terms->term_bad);
+ strbuf_addstr(&terms->term_bad, argv[++i]);
+ }
+ else if (skip_prefix(argv[i], "--term-bad=", &argv[i])) {
+ must_write_terms = 1;
+ strbuf_reset(&terms->term_bad);
+ strbuf_addstr(&terms->term_bad, argv[i]);
+ }
+ else if (skip_prefix(argv[i], "--term-new=", &argv[i])) {
+ must_write_terms = 1;
+ strbuf_reset(&terms->term_good);
+ strbuf_addstr(&terms->term_good, argv[i]);
+ }
+ else if (starts_with(argv[i], "--") &&
+ !one_of(argv[i], "--term-good", "--term-bad", NULL)) {
+ string_list_clear(&revs, 0);
+ string_list_clear(&states, 0);
+ die(_("unrecognised option: '%s'"), argv[i]);
+ }
+ else if (get_oid(argv[i], &oid) && !has_double_dash) {And here checking "!has_double_dash" has no meaning if you check for a double dash in the same loop, because there is a "break" after has_double_dash is set above.
+ string_list_clear(&revs, 0);
+ string_list_clear(&states, 0);
+ free(commit_id);
+ die(_("'%s' does not appear to be a valid revision"), argv[i]);
+ }
+ else {
+ free(commit_id);
+ string_list_append(&revs, oid_to_hex(&oid));
+ }
+ }
+ pathspec_pos = i;
+