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 09/13] revert: Catch incompatible command-line options early
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 04:53:34 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110702095334.GA19090@elie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinN6KdPnuMWbrdE4jf4ijKDC=35Aw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Ram,
Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>> The naive reader (i.e., me) wonders: how long does this option parsing
>> and populating the options structure that we want to delay until after
>> verify_opt_compatible take? Does that delay matter or is there some
>> other reason for this change?
>
> I've tried to spell out the motivation for this change more clearly in
> my latest iteration. Does this look alright?
>
> revert: Catch incompatible command-line options in parse_args
>
> Some incompatible command-line options are caught in pick_commits
> after parse_args has parsed the options and populated the options
> structure. Change this so that parse_args only parses valid
> command-line options instead of returning an unusable options
> structure. However, this does not mean that we will never need to
> check the options structure; when a sequencer API is written future,
> callers will call in with a pre-populated options structure whose
> validity we will still need to check. Also, provide a
> verify_opt_compatible function to handle incompatible options in a
> general manner.
Alas, I still don't get it. How can I (the fearful reader) demonstrate
the problem that this fixes? Is it a big problem? How does the patch
fix it? Does the patch have downsides, or is it mostly risk-free?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-02 9:53 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
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 [this message]
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=20110702095334.GA19090@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.