From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:19774 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758562Ab2JYObA (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:31:00 -0400 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q9PEUoXO019737 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:30:55 -0400 Message-ID: <50894D14.9090101@RedHat.com> Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:30:44 -0400 From: Steve Dickson MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeff Layton CC: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/10] nfsdcltrack: add a new "one-shot" program for manipulating the client tracking db References: <1351092359-25842-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> <1351092359-25842-6-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> <5089371A.9010005@RedHat.com> <20121025095327.1d463b4c@corrin.poochiereds.net> In-Reply-To: <20121025095327.1d463b4c@corrin.poochiereds.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 25/10/12 09:53, Jeff Layton wrote: >> Is needs_arg really necessary? Once the function is found, just pass >> > it the rest of argv and let the function decide if there should >> > be an argument or not... but again.. just a nit... >> > >> > steved. > No, it's not strictly necessary. The alternative though is to make the > command functions do argv processing, which seemed more ugly to me. I > tend to prefer to keep argv processing in a single place since it can > get sort of hairy to work through the bounds checks after getopt and > such. > > If you feel strongly about it, I can try to change it, but I don't > think the result will be cleaner. > Like I said its a nit... Just a different way to look at it... no issues here keeping it as is... steved.