On 2015-06-17 15:43, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 03:06:26PM -0400, Richard Hansen wrote:
>> + say_color_error=$(tput bold; tput setaf 1) # bold red
>> + say_color_skip=$(tput setaf 4) # blue
>> + say_color_warn=$(tput setaf 3) # brown/yellow
>> + say_color_pass=$(tput setaf 2) # green
>> + say_color_info=$(tput setaf 6) # cyan
>> + say_color_sgr0=$(tput sgr0)
>> [...]
>> + error|skip|warn|pass|info)
>> + eval "say_color_color=\$say_color_$1";;
>> *)
>> test -n "$quiet" && return;;
>
> I think you could dispense with this case statement entirely and do:
>
> eval "say_color_color=\$say_color_$1"
> if test -z "$say_color_color"; then
> test -n "$quiet" && return
> fi
>
> I guess that is making the assumption that all colors have non-zero
> sizes, but that seems reasonable.
We could test if the variable is set first (test -n "${foo+set}"), at
the cost of a bit more complexity.
> I do not mind it so much as you have
> it, but it does mean adding a new field needs to update two spots.
I also don't like the duplicate list of color types, and I considered
doing something similar to what you suggested, but I decided against it.
I'm a bit worried about bizarre syntax errors or code execution if
say_color() is used improperly. ('eval' with uncontrolled variables
makes me nervous.)
Thanks for reviewing,
Richard
--
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