From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9F70C433E0 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 20:29:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7230D64F70 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 20:29:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239364AbhCDU3J (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Mar 2021 15:29:09 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:59235 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239370AbhCDU3C (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Mar 2021 15:29:02 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D614EA7CE6; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 15:28:21 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=UNYG9BJ/PcF0adxYCQSPu8QKwqg=; b=pJNTjc 4nIuRKwY3Xgu8DM4Gro9k0inHhD55tuhXvKilH09v9RHklpUwSgxWF0BOrPnbfYD AwTFFjQbSLxgVyrHeaZ+uoC2oIsvgC2dUbu2ndSW/X6DO2Wb9YYMPKV8kgYEHQRA Z8DHDmV7ZPGhXbXwjmaq20EpTWHuEmg/mYogM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=D9BNmB8dw9aWwmTKV3zeMWe+nmeZWwbN aIUQJM+tO27ooW15iBGH1dq7847STC9SGzXLDGosrSwx4s6ixyW4OXK2PeqJt3fT ZPE6uoZgOTKMeHEHeTtFAGYxkCfcyH5HdyWerTK0ljJ/i+4wmgxa62DWrKK/8AXi 2H38TOx2aPg= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC312A7CE5; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 15:28:21 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4DCBBA7CE4; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 15:28:21 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Jeff Hostetler , Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, SZEDER =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor?= , Johannes Schindelin , Jeff Hostetler Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/12] pkt-line: (optionally) libify the packet readers References: <6b1ce8c0-0881-77a0-deda-677e34560cc0@jeffhostetler.com> Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 12:28:20 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 4 Mar 2021 09:40:16 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 298082B4-7D28-11EB-BAC1-D152C8D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > I think the flag is doing sensible things; it's just that the word > "never" in the name is confusing, since it is "never except this one > time". > > Would PACKET_READ_GENTLE_ON_READ_ERROR be a better name, to match > GENTLE_ON_EOF? I was tempted to just call it "ON_ERROR", since it also > include parsing errors, but maybe somebody would think that includes ERR > packets (that is more of a stretch, though, I think). > > Likewise, I kind of wonder if callers would really prefer suppressing > the error() calls, too. Saying "error: the remote end hung up > unexpectedly" is not that helpful if the "remote end" we are talking > about is fsmonitor, and not the server side of a fetch. Both sounds sensible.