Re: [RFC] Cleaning up die() error messages

[Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>]

Elfyn McBratney <beu@gentoo.org> writes:

> (Of course, the C parts (`prog' and `set_prog_name()') would go into a
> header, and not in every single C source file. ;)
>
> So, any thoughts/comments/flames? :)

I do not have objections to either one, except I tend to prefer
programs that tells its full path when erroring out, which helps
me identify "Oops, my path was screwed up and I am not testing
the right one" case.

One thing to keep in mind is how badly this C part might
interact with the libification effort going on underwater.
Since current code Smurf is working on is based on 0.99.6 and
many small pieces need to be reviewed anyway, I am not so much
worried about forward porting the changes.  But some die()s that
are in the parts that will be moved to the common library code
would also want to use this prog global somehow.

But that would not be too much of a problem.  Worst case, we
force the library clients to do set_prog_name(), or initialize
prog to "(unnamed)", or do both.