On Tue, 2014-07-15 at 11:17 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Tue, 2014-07-15 at 09:03 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > ...
> >> >> Yes, that is fun.
> >> >>
> >> >> I actually think your "In 'version:pefname' and 'wersion:refname',
> >> >> we want be able to report 'pefname' and 'wersion' are misspelled,
> >> >> and returning -1 or enum would not cut it" is a good argument. The
> >> >> callee wants to have flexibility on _what_ to report, just as the
> >> >> caller wants to have flexibility on _how_. In this particular code
> >> >> path, I think the former far outweighs the latter, and my suggestion
> >> >> I called "silly" might not be so silly but may have struck the right
> >> >> balance. I dunno.
> > ...
> > I agree. But what about going back to the older setup where the caller
> > can output correct error message? I'm ok with using an enum style
> > return, to be completely honest. I would prefer this, actually.
>
> Depends on which older setup you mean, I think. The one that does
> not let us easily give more context dependent diagnoses that lets us
> distinguish between version:pefname and version:refname by returning
> only -1 or an enum?
>
I am going to re-submit this with an enum-style return. I am also
changing how we parse so that we can correctly report whether the sort
function or sort atom is incorrect.
Thanks,
Jake
��.n��������+%������w��{.n��������n�r������&��z�ޗ�zf���h���~����������_��+v���)ߣ�