Re: [PATCH 2/5] *: relax git_configset_get_value_multi result
From: Taylor Blau <hidden>
Date: 2022-09-28 15:59:25
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 02:08:28PM +0000, Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote:
From: Derrick Stolee <redacted>
Should the patch message be: *: relax git_config_get_value_multi() result instead of referring to git_configset_get_value_multi?
--- builtin/submodule--helper.c | 10 ++++++++-- submodule.c | 2 +- t/helper/test-config.c | 4 ++-- versioncmp.c | 8 ++++---- 4 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
All looks good here. I did a git grep for git_config_get_value_multi() to make sure all of those spots were covered here. No comments from me, other than a little thinking aloud below on a couple of the conversions.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -552,7 +553,9 @@ static int module_init(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) * If there are no path args and submodule.active is set then, * by default, only initialize 'active' modules. */ - if (!argc && git_config_get_value_multi("submodule.active")) + if (!argc && + (active_modules = git_config_get_value_multi("submodule.active")) && + active_modules->nr)
Yuck ;-). I was going to suggest that the addition of a helper function
something like:
static int any_configured(const char *key)
{
const struct string_list *vals = git_configset_get_value_multi(key);
return vals && vals->nr;
}
would be worthwhile for this and the below conversion, but the change at
the end of this series makes it a moot point. So the temporary eye-sore
is just fine.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/t/helper/test-config.c b/t/helper/test-config.c index 4ba9eb65606..62644dd71d7 100644 --- a/t/helper/test-config.c +++ b/t/helper/test-config.c@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ int cmd__config(int argc, const char **argv) } } else if (argc == 3 && !strcmp(argv[1], "get_value_multi")) { strptr = git_config_get_value_multi(argv[2]); - if (strptr) { + if (strptr && strptr->nr) { for (i = 0; i < strptr->nr; i++) { v = strptr->items[i].string; if (!v)
Good catch. I was thinking that this whole "if" statement could have been dropped, but the goto that is hidden by the context meant that this *would* have been a behavior change otherwise. So the conversion here is appropriate. Thanks, Taylor