On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:44 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> diff --git a/ref-filter.c b/ref-filter.c
>> index 7d2732a..b098b16 100644
>> --- a/ref-filter.c
>> +++ b/ref-filter.c
>> @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ static struct {
>> { "color" },
>> { "align" },
>> { "end" },
>> + { "contents:lines" },
>
> Do we even need "contents:lines" and existing other "contents:blah"
> in this list in the first place? If they are needed, group them
> together, not append at the end.
>
> I wonder how this code sensibly can parse "%(contents:lines=6)".
> After splitting the format string at %( and closing ), the code
> calls parse_ref_filter_atom() and the rule that helper function uses
> to figure out the atom-name proper (which is to be checked against
> the valid_atom[] array) is to find the first colon, so
>
> %(contents:lines=6)
>
> would cause "contents:lines=6" to be fed parse_ref_filter_atom(),
> it cheks if "contents" is in the valid_atom[] array (it is), and
> stores the whole thing in used_atom[].
>
> So in that sense, match_atom_name() would do the right thing, but
> that would make any reader of this code realize that she never saw
> "contents:lines" entry in valid_atom[] array being used during this
> process.
True.
We could remove all the contents:<subvalue> atoms from this list.
--
Regards,
Karthik Nayak
--
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