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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).