From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Heiko Voigt <hvoigt@hvoigt.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] config: do not ungetc EOF
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 16:28:47 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150205212847.GA2360@peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqr3u4jbyj.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 01:16:36PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 01:53:27AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> >
> >> I also notice that config_buf_ungetc does not actually ungetc the
> >> character we give it; it just rewinds one character in the stream. This
> >> is fine, because we always feed the last-retrieved character. I dunno if
> >> it is worth fixing (it also would have fixed this infinite loop, but for
> >> the wrong reason; we would have stuck "-1" back into the stream, and
> >> retrieved it on the next fgetc rather than the same '\r' over and over).
> >
> > Here's a patch to deal with that. I'm not sure if it's worth doing or
> > not.
>
> I am not sure, either. If this were to become stdio emulator over
> random in-core data used throughout the system, perhaps.
>
> But in its current form it is tied to the implementation of config.c
> very strongly, so...
Yeah, that was my thinking, and why I have doubts. Maybe a comment would
make more sense, like the patch below. I am also OK with just leaving
it as-is.
-- >8 --
Subject: [PATCH] config_buf_ungetc: document quirks in a comment
Our config_buf_ungetc implements just enough for the config
code to work. That's OK, but we would not want anyone to
mistakenly move it elsewhere as a general purpose ungetc.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
---
config.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/config.c b/config.c
index 2c63099..089a94f 100644
--- a/config.c
+++ b/config.c
@@ -71,6 +71,12 @@ static int config_buf_fgetc(struct config_source *conf)
return EOF;
}
+/*
+ * Note that this is not a real ungetc replacement. It only rewinds
+ * the position, and ignores the "c" parameter, rather than
+ * putting it into our (const) buffer. That's good enough for
+ * the callers here, though.
+ */
static int config_buf_ungetc(int c, struct config_source *conf)
{
if (conf->u.buf.pos > 0)
--
2.3.0.rc1.287.g761fd19
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-05 21:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-05 6:53 [PATCH] config: do not ungetc EOF Jeff King
2015-02-05 21:00 ` Jeff King
2015-02-05 21:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-05 21:28 ` Jeff King [this message]
2015-02-08 21:22 ` Heiko Voigt
2015-02-08 21:13 ` Heiko Voigt
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=20150205212847.GA2360@peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=hvoigt@hvoigt.net \
/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).