On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Introduce a ref_formatting_state which will eventually hold the values
> of modifier atoms. Implement this within ref-filter.
>
> Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> +static void apply_formatting_state(struct ref_formatting_state *state, struct strbuf *final)
> +{
> + /* More formatting options to be evetually added */
> + strbuf_addbuf(final, state->output);
> + strbuf_release(state->output);
I guess the idea here is that you intend state->output to be re-used
and it is convenient to "clear" it here rather than making that the
responsibility of each caller. For re-use, it is more typical to use
strbuf_reset() than strbuf_release() (though Junio may disagree[1]).
[1]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/273094
> +}
> +
> void show_ref_array_item(struct ref_array_item *info, const char *format, int quote_style)
> {
> const char *cp, *sp, *ep;
> - struct strbuf output = STRBUF_INIT;
> + struct strbuf value = STRBUF_INIT;
> + struct strbuf final_buf = STRBUF_INIT;
> + struct ref_formatting_state state;
> int i;
>
> + memset(&state, 0, sizeof(state));
> + state.quote_style = quote_style;
> + state.output = &value;
It feels strange to assign a local variable reference to state.output,
and there's no obvious reason why you should need to do so. I would
have instead expected ref_format_state to be declared as:
struct ref_formatting_state {
int quote_style;
struct strbuf output;
};
and initialized as so:
memset(&state, 0, sizeof(state));
state.quote_style = quote_style;
strbuf_init(&state.output, 0);
(In fact, the memset() isn't even necessary here since you're
initializing all fields explicitly, though perhaps you want the
memset() because a future patch adds more fields which are not
initialized explicitly?)
This still allows re-use via strbuf_reset() mentioned above.
And, of course, you'd want to strbuf_release() it at the end of this
function where you're already releasing final_buf.
> for (cp = format; *cp && (sp = find_next(cp)); cp = ep + 1) {
> - struct atom_value *atomv;
> + struct atom_value *atomv = NULL;
What is this change about?
> ep = strchr(sp, ')');
> - if (cp < sp)
> - emit(cp, sp, &output);
> + if (cp < sp) {
> + emit(cp, sp, &state);
> + apply_formatting_state(&state, &final_buf);
> + }
> get_ref_atom_value(info, parse_ref_filter_atom(sp + 2, ep), &atomv);
> - print_value(atomv, quote_style, &output);
> + process_formatting_state(atomv, &state);
> + print_value(atomv, &state);
> + apply_formatting_state(&state, &final_buf);
> }
> if (*cp) {
> sp = cp + strlen(cp);
> - emit(cp, sp, &output);
> + emit(cp, sp, &state);
> + apply_formatting_state(&state, &final_buf);
I'm getting the feeling that these functions
(process_formatting_state, print_value, emit, apply_formatting_state)
are becoming misnamed (again) with the latest structural changes (but
perhaps I haven't read far enough into the series yet?).
process_formatting_state() is rather generic.
print_value() and emit() both imply outputting something, but neither
does so anymore.
apply_formatting_state() seems to be more about finalizing the
already-formatted output.
--
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