Git development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Cc: Toon Claes <toon@iotcl.com>,
	 git@vger.kernel.org,  Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] replay: refactor enum replay_mode into a bool
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2026 08:43:09 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq7bnq37jm.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ajk-YQxLWfspNWIm@pks.im> (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Mon, 22 Jun 2026 15:53:37 +0200")

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 02:41:55PM +0200, Toon Claes wrote:
>> In 2760ee4983 (replay: add --revert mode to reverse commit changes,
>> 2026-03-26) the enum `replay_mode` was introduced. This has two possible
>> values:
>> 
>>  - The value `REPLAY_MODE_REVERT` is used when option `--revert` is
>>    passed to git-replay(1). When using this value the commits are
>>    processed in reverse order and the inverse of the changes are
>>    applied.
>> 
>>  - The value `REPLAY_MODE_PICK` is used when either option `--onto` or
>>    `--advance` is used. In both cases the commits are processed in
>>    normal order, and the changes are applied as-is.
>> 
>> Since there are only two possible values of this enum, simplify the code
>> by converting the enum into a bool. This avoids adding code paths that
>> check for invalid values of the enum, and shortens code where the value
>> is checked with a ternary operator.
>
> That's fair, and the result is easier to write. But is it really easier
> to read? And what if we ever have to create a third mode going forward?
>
> I'm generally no fan of booleans as parameters as they basically give
> you no information at all at the callsite, except if you're lucky and
> you already have an aptly-named variable available that you can pass.
> Which seems to be the case here, but I'm still not sure whether this
> change really improves the code.

I tend to agree with you on both counts.  The "what happens when
somebody else wants a third choice?" is a quesiton I would ask the
first thing as the maintainer of a project.

Even if the boolean parameter is so obviously named, the callsite
can only say "true" or "false", unlike some other popular languages
that lets you say

	my_function(use_revert_mode=true, verbose=false);

and you cannot tell what effect the author wanted out of that "true"
if all you can write were

	my_function(true, false);

Of course, we could go ultra verbose, like

	my_function(true, /* use_revert_mode */
		    false, /* verbose */);

but then we are often better off writing:

	my_function(REPLAY_MODE_REVERT, REPLAY_QUIET);

Thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-22 15:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-08 18:37 [PATCH 0/3] Teach git-replay(1) to linearize merge commits Toon Claes
2026-06-08 18:37 ` [PATCH 1/3] replay: refactor enum replay_mode into a bool Toon Claes
2026-06-08 18:37 ` [PATCH 2/3] replay: add helper to put entry into mapped_commits Toon Claes
2026-06-08 18:37 ` [PATCH 3/3] replay: offer an option to linearize the commit topology Toon Claes
2026-06-08 19:29   ` Junio C Hamano
2026-06-10 14:26     ` Toon Claes
2026-06-10 14:49 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Teach git-replay(1) to linearize merge commits Toon Claes
2026-06-10 14:49   ` [PATCH v2 1/3] replay: refactor enum replay_mode into a bool Toon Claes
2026-06-11 15:09     ` Justin Tobler
2026-06-12  8:19       ` Toon Claes
2026-06-10 14:49   ` [PATCH v2 2/3] replay: add helper to put entry into mapped_commits Toon Claes
2026-06-10 14:49   ` [PATCH v2 3/3] replay: offer an option to linearize the commit topology Toon Claes
2026-06-10 17:02     ` Junio C Hamano
2026-06-16  8:38       ` Toon Claes
2026-06-14  6:56     ` Elijah Newren
2026-06-16  7:09       ` Toon Claes
2026-06-16  9:26   ` [PATCH v3 0/3] Teach git-replay(1) to linearize merge commits Toon Claes
2026-06-16  9:26     ` [PATCH v3 1/3] replay: refactor enum replay_mode into a bool Toon Claes
2026-06-16  9:26     ` [PATCH v3 2/3] replay: add helper to put entry into mapped_commits Toon Claes
2026-06-16  9:26     ` [PATCH v3 3/3] replay: offer an option to linearize the commit topology Toon Claes
2026-06-22 12:41     ` [PATCH v4 0/3] Teach git-replay(1) to linearize merge commits Toon Claes
2026-06-22 12:41       ` [PATCH v4 1/3] replay: refactor enum replay_mode into a bool Toon Claes
2026-06-22 13:53         ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-06-22 15:43           ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2026-06-22 12:41       ` [PATCH v4 2/3] replay: add helper to put entry into mapped_commits Toon Claes
2026-06-22 13:53         ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-06-22 12:41       ` [PATCH v4 3/3] replay: offer an option to linearize the commit topology Toon Claes
2026-06-22 13:53         ` Patrick Steinhardt

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=xmqq7bnq37jm.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=newren@gmail.com \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    --cc=toon@iotcl.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