On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Matthieu Moy
<Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Tanay Abhra <tanayabh@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On 8/5/2014 12:29 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Tanay Abhra <tanayabh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> - if (skip_prefix(var, "http.", &p)) {
>>>> - int i;
>>>> -
>>>> - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(rpc_service); i++) {
>>>> - struct rpc_service *svc = &rpc_service[i];
>>>> - if (!strcmp(p, svc->config_name)) {
>>>> - svc->enabled = git_config_bool(var, value);
>>>> - return 0;
>>>> - }
>>>> - }
>>>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(rpc_service); i++) {
>>>> + struct rpc_service *svc = &rpc_service[i];
>>>> + strbuf_addf(&var, "http.%s", svc->config_name);
>>>> + if (!git_config_get_bool(var.buf, &value))
>>>> + svc->enabled = value;
>>>> + strbuf_reset(&var);
>>>> }
>>>
>>> There is a behavior change here. The original code set svc->enabled to
>>> the first matching rpc_service[] entry, whereas the new code sets it
>>> to the last matching entry. Is this change intentional?
>>>
>>
>> I was preparing the reroll and I saw that I had missed your mail.
>> I think that I haven't changed the behaviour, the original one is
>> written in callback form so it has to go through the array every time for each
>> new value.
>> When there are multiple entries for a service say,
>>
>> http.receivepack = 1
>> http.receivepack = 0
>
> I first got convinced by Eric, but I now think you're right.
>
> Eric's point was (I think) not about multiple entries for the same
> variable, but about multiple entries for different services, like
>
> http.receivepack = 1
> http.uploadpack = 0
>
> The order of assignments to svn->enabled change, but it doesn't matter
> because svc is just a local variable pointing to the right element of
> rpc_service[i]. So in both cases, you'll assign
>
> rpc_service[<index of service>].enabled = <last occurence of variable http.<service> >
>
> even though the order of assignments will change.
>
> Eric, am I interpreting right?
Yes. During initial review, I either didn't read the old code closely
enough or I misinterpreted it. Upon re-read, Tanay's rewrite looks
fine.
--
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