From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
To: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Cc: Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>,
Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/13] revert: Introduce struct to keep command-line options
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:58:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110621165854.GL15461@elie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1308661489-20080-8-git-send-email-artagnon@gmail.com>
Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
> The current code uses a set of file-scope static variables to tell the
> cherry-pick/ revert machinery how to replay the changes, and
> initializes them by parsing the command-line arguments. In later
> steps in this series, we would like to introduce an API function that
> calls into this machinery directly and have a way to tell it what to
> do. Hence, introduce a structure to group these variables, so that
> the API can take them as a single replay_options parameter.
The struct leaves out the variable "me". A person might wonder why
the above rationale applies to the other variables but not that one. :)
> Unfortunately, parsing strategy-option violates a C89 rule:
> Initializers cannot refer to variables whose address is not known at
> compile time.
Reading this, one is led to wonder:
- is this a regression?
- is it a necessary consequence of the positive change?
- will it matter --- i.e., does the rest of git follow that rule to
be able to build on old-fashioned compilers, and is there any
intention to?
- how can I get my compiler to tell me about it?
- is it fundamental or not? i.e., is this a "we introduced this
minor regression and expect it will be fixed later" or "this points
to a flaw in the design and we hope someone comes up with a better
design that doesn't have that problem"?
By the way, as a side note, here are a couple of patches about the
same subject that I use to test with "-std=c89 -pedantic" privately.
http://repo.or.cz/w/git/jrn.git/commit/faa4b89731e5411fbdf6812f11748a20e664361d
http://repo.or.cz/w/git/jrn.git/commit/92a0c179cb7690bdf6f8fbbfa2253b883d02bd17
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-21 16:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-21 13:04 [PATCH 00/13] Sequencer with continuation features Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 01/13] advice: Introduce error_resolve_conflict Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 15:55 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-21 18:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-07-02 9:44 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-07-02 10:09 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 02/13] revert: Factor out add_message_to_msg function Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 15:58 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-21 19:01 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 03/13] revert: Don't check lone argument in get_encoding Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 16:03 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 04/13] revert: Propogate errors upwards from do_pick_commit Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 16:22 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-21 19:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-06-21 19:32 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-21 20:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-07-02 10:31 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 05/13] revert: Eliminate global "commit" variable Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 16:52 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-21 19:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 06/13] revert: Rename no_replay to record_origin Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 07/13] revert: Introduce struct to keep command-line options Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 16:58 ` Jonathan Nieder [this message]
2011-06-21 19:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 08/13] revert: Separate cmdline parsing from functional code Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 17:00 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 09/13] revert: Catch incompatible command-line options early Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 17:04 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-07-02 9:47 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-07-02 9:53 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-07-02 10:04 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-07-02 11:19 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-07-02 11:30 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-07-02 20:02 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 10/13] revert: Persist data for continuation Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 17:11 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-21 19:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 11/13] revert: Introduce a layer of indirection over pick_commits Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 19:59 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [PATCH 12/13] revert: Introduce skip-all to cleanup sequencer data Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 20:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-07-02 6:24 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-07-04 4:59 ` Miles Bader
2011-07-05 10:47 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 13:04 ` [RFC PATCH 13/13] revert: Introduce --continue to continue the operation Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-21 17:19 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-21 15:48 ` [PATCH 00/13] Sequencer with continuation features Jonathan Nieder
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110621165854.GL15461@elie \
--to=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=artagnon@gmail.com \
--cc=barkalow@iabervon.org \
--cc=chriscool@tuxfamily.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.