Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> I was playing with a hook for file size limits that wanted to store the
>> limit in git-config. It turns out we don't do a very good job of big
>> integers:
>>
>> $ git config foo.size 2g
>> $ git config --int foo.size
>> -2147483648
>>
>> Oops. After this series, we properly notice the error:
>>
>> $ git config --int foo.size
>> fatal: bad config value for 'foo.size' in .git/config
>>
>> and even better, provide a way to access large values:
>>
>> $ git config --ulong foo.size
>> 2147483648
>
> I may be missing something, but why do we even need a new option for
> the command that is known to always produce textual output?
>
> As you said "Oops", the first example that shows a string of digits
> prefixed by a minus sign for input "2g" is buggy, and I think it is
> perfectly reasonable to fix it to show a stringified representation
> of 2*1024*1024*1024 when asked for "--int".
>
> What am I missing???
If this applied on the writing side, I would understand it very
much, i.e.
$ git config --int32 foo.size 2g
fatal: "2g" is too large to be read as "int32".
and as a complement it may make sense as a warning mechanism to also
error out when existing value does not fit on the "platform" int, so
your
>> $ git config --int foo.size
>> fatal: bad config value for 'foo.size' in .git/config
might make sense (even though I'd suggest being more explicit than
"bad value" in this case---"the value specified will not fit when
used in a variable of type int on this platform"). When .git/config
is shared on two different boxes (think: NFS), the size of "int"
might be different between them, so the logic to produce such a
warning may have to explicitly check against int32_t, not platform
int and say "will not fit in 'int' on some machines".
I dunno.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html