Re: [PATCH v3] commit.c: Replace starts_with() with skip_prefix()

[karthik nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>]

Hey Eric,

Its been nice learning from you about how to submit patches to git.
was a nice learning curve, now I'm looking into the ideas and will contact the
appropriate mentor soon with a plan.

Thanks
- Karthik

On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 5:49 AM, karthik nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello Eric,
>> Thanks for your reply, and for that information.  should i patch again or
>> this should do?
>> And what next? Talk to the mentor?
>
> The ultimate authority deciding if a patch is ready is Junio, as it
> would have to be accepted into his tree. Since he already accepted a
> similar patch from a different potential GSoC applicant, it may not
> make sense to refine this one further. What is important is that you
> are now familiar with the review process on this project, and the
> mentors (hopefully) have gained insight into your abilities and how
> you interact with reviewers (which was the goal of these
> microprojects).
>
> Probably best at this point is to consider a proposed project [1] or
> choose your own, and start the task of applying for a GSoC position
> (by whatever means that is done).
>
> [1]: https://github.com/git/git.github.io/blob/master/SoC-2014-Ideas.md
>
>> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Replace all instances of starts_with() by skip_prefix(),
>>> > which can not only be used to check presence of a prefix,
>>> > but also used further on as it returns the string after the prefix,
>>> > if the prefix is present. And also manages to do, what the current
>>> > code does in two steps.
>>>
>>> Better. Thanks.
>>>
>>> > Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
>>> > ---
>>> > Hello Eric,
>>> > In this patch, I have:
>>> > 1. Fixed the improper placement of buf_date , initialised to a NULL
>>> > string.
>>> > 2. Fixed whitespace.
>>> > 3. Better naming as per your suggestion.
>>> > 4. Fixed the initilisation before the if statement.
>>> > Thanks for your suggestion.
>>> > ---
>>> >  commit.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
>>> >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>> >
>>> > diff --git a/commit.c b/commit.c
>>> > index 6bf4fe0..4144e00 100644
>>> > --- a/commit.c
>>> > +++ b/commit.c
>>> > @@ -553,6 +553,7 @@ static void record_author_date(struct
>>> > author_date_slab *author_date,
>>> >         struct ident_split ident;
>>> >         char *date_end;
>>> >         unsigned long date;
>>> > +       const char *buf_date;
>>> >
>>> >         if (!commit->buffer) {
>>> >                 unsigned long size;
>>> > @@ -565,15 +566,15 @@ static void record_author_date(struct
>>> > author_date_slab *author_date,
>>> >         for (buf = commit->buffer ? commit->buffer : buffer;
>>> >              buf;
>>> >              buf = line_end + 1) {
>>> > +               buf_date = skip_prefix(buf, "author ");
>>>
>>> The data after "author " is identification information (name, email),
>>> not date. In fact, this information gets passed to the function
>>> split_ident_line(), so a better name for this variable is 'ident_line'
>>> (but not the misspelling 'indent_line' from one of your earlier
>>> attempts).
>>>
>>> >                 line_end = strchrnul(buf, '\n');
>>> > -               if (!starts_with(buf, "author ")) {
>>> > +               if (!buf_date) {
>>> >                         if (!line_end[0] || line_end[1] == '\n')
>>> >                                 return; /* end of header */
>>> >                         continue;
>>> >                 }
>>> > -               if (split_ident_line(&ident,
>>> > -                                    buf + strlen("author "),
>>> > -                                    line_end - (buf + strlen("author
>>> > "))) ||
>>> > +               if (split_ident_line(&ident, buf_date,
>>> > +                                    line_end - buf_date) ||
>>> >                     !ident.date_begin || !ident.date_end)
>>> >                         goto fail_exit; /* malformed "author" line */
>>> >                 break;
>>> > @@ -1098,6 +1099,7 @@ int parse_signed_commit(const unsigned char *sha1,
>>> >         char *buffer = read_sha1_file(sha1, &type, &size);
>>> >         int in_signature, saw_signature = -1;
>>> >         char *line, *tail;
>>> > +       const char *gpg_sig;
>>> >
>>> >         if (!buffer || type != OBJ_COMMIT)
>>> >                 goto cleanup;
>>> > @@ -1113,9 +1115,9 @@ int parse_signed_commit(const unsigned char *sha1,
>>> >                 next = next ? next + 1 : tail;
>>> >                 if (in_signature && line[0] == ' ')
>>> >                         sig = line + 1;
>>> > -               else if (starts_with(line, gpg_sig_header) &&
>>> > -                        line[gpg_sig_header_len] == ' ')
>>> > -                       sig = line + gpg_sig_header_len + 1;
>>> > +               else if ((gpg_sig = skip_prefix(line, gpg_sig_header))
>>> > +                         && gpg_sig[0] == ' ')
>>> > +                       sig = gpg_sig + 1;
>>>
>>> Other than the poor variable name 'buf_date' and the review comments
>>> by Junio and Tanay that this particular change is of questionable
>>> value and perhaps should be dropped, this version of the patch looks
>>> reasonable.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> >                 if (sig) {
>>> >                         strbuf_add(signature, sig, next - sig);
>>> >                         saw_signature = 1;
>>> > @@ -1193,10 +1195,8 @@ static void parse_gpg_output(struct
>>> > signature_check *sigc)
>>> >         for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(sigcheck_gpg_status); i++) {
>>> >                 const char *found, *next;
>>> >
>>> > -               if (starts_with(buf, sigcheck_gpg_status[i].check + 1))
>>> > {
>>> > -                       /* At the very beginning of the buffer */
>>> > -                       found = buf +
>>> > strlen(sigcheck_gpg_status[i].check + 1);
>>> > -               } else {
>>> > +               found = skip_prefix(buf, sigcheck_gpg_status[i].check +
>>> > 1);
>>> > +               if (!found) {
>>> >                         found = strstr(buf,
>>> > sigcheck_gpg_status[i].check);
>>> >                         if (!found)
>>> >                                 continue;
>>> > --
>>> > 1.9.0.138.g2de3478
>>> >
>>
>>