From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Cc: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
"Git ML" <git@vger.kernel.org>,
"Jonathan Tan" <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Subject: Re: BUG: Various "advice.*" config doesn't work
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 09:28:02 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq1r0nke71.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YfgLeVw0rrk7Q5/+@nand.local> (Taylor Blau's message of "Mon, 31 Jan 2022 11:16:57 -0500")
Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:
> But having something like (in builtin/add.c:add_files()):
>
> if (advice_enabled(ADVICE_ADD_IGNORED_FILES))
> advise(_("..."));
>
> feels like it opens the door to call advise() by default if we happened
> to forget to read the configuration.
True.
> I think that is a good candidate to
> be replaced with advice_if_enabled().
Meaning advice_enabled() will lazily load the configuration? If so,
then what you saw in builtin/add.c::add_files() would automatically
become just as safe as advice_if_enabled(), no?
> I'm not sure if that is true in general, though. Take a look at this
> example (from branch.c:create_branch()):
>
> if (advice_enabled(ADVICE_SET_UPSTREAM_FAILURE)) {
> error(_(upstream_missing), start_name);
> advise(_(upstream_advice));
> exit(1);
> }
> die(_(upstream_missing), start_name);
>
> This also makes it possible to call advise() when we shouldn't have. But
> how should we rewrite this code? Wanting to either error() (and then
> call exit(1)) or die() based on whether or not we're going to print the
> advice makes it tricky.
I am puzzled why you think the above "check, do things, give a
piece of advice, and do even more things" needs to be rewritten.
Everything you are showing above becomes a problem only when
advice_enabled() does not work reliably, due to a bug that fails to
read the configuration.
> Maybe, though I still think BUG() is a bit extreme, and we could
> accomplish the same by having the advice API just read the config if it
> hasn't done so already before emitting advice.
Calling things like git_config(git_default_config) with side-effects
on other global variables are definitely a no-no, but as long as it
reacts to configuration variables only under advice.* namespace,
that might be OK.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-31 17:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-28 9:33 BUG: Various "advice.*" config doesn't work Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-31 16:16 ` Taylor Blau
2022-01-31 17:28 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2022-01-31 17:34 ` Taylor Blau
2022-01-31 17:46 ` Junio C Hamano
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=xmqq1r0nke71.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.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).