Re: [PATCH 1/5] Change git_connect() to return a struct child_process instead of a pid_t.

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> writes:

> Junio C Hamano schrieb:
> ...
>> As to error indication, it somehow does not feel right to return
>> something called "child _process_" structure when we want to
>> tell the caller that there is no process to wait for in the
>> no-error case, although the fact that we can use .in/.out fd in
>> the structure when we _do_ have child process is attractive.
>
> Did you mean: "even if we don't have a child process"?
>
> How about a typedef if you dislike the name?
>
>> As an alternative, we could keep the "NULL return means there
>> was no need to fork" semantics of git_connect(), and instead add
>> "int *status_ret" parameter for the caller to check.
>
> Seriously? Add an *out* parameter when we can get rid of one and have
> a return value, too?

Ah, I somehow got confused and thought that the caller decides
not to do the waitpid business at the end of the connection, but
as everybody calls finish_connect() with what it got from
git_connect(), as long as the fake "child_process" structure
records something to let finish_connect() know that it should
not waitpid() on the process, all is well.

It might make sense to teach finish_command() that a magic value
of (cmd->pid == 0) means there is no process to wait for and
this "child_process" structure is only about the in/out stream
to the other side.