Re: [PATCH/RFC 09/10] ref-filter: introduce contents_atom_parser()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> +void contents_atom_parser(struct used_atom *atom)
>>> +{
>>> +       const char * buf;
>>> +
>>> +       if (match_atom_name(atom->str, "contents", &buf))
>>> +               atom->u.contents.all = 1;
>>> +
>>> +       if (!buf)
>>> +               return;
>
> Also, isn't this logic somewhat bogus? u.contents.all is set to 1 for
> both bare %(contents) and decorated %(contents:whatever). Then, below,
> you also set one of .body, .signature, .subject, or .lines if a
> decoration is specified. So, now you have both .all and one of the
> other attributes set to 1, which is rather nonsensical (if I
> understand correctly).
>

The problem is its not mutually exclusive here, the 'all' was supposed to
act as a way of checking if its a contents atom, since populate_value() doesn't
really check that again.

So if any of the others were selected we would implement %(contents:<value>)
else the bare %(contents:<value>) would be selected.

> If you change this to an enum as suggested in my previous email, then
> the problem goes away.
>

Yup. Will do. Thanks

-- 
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]