Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I actually do not think we mind git_parse_int(), git_parse_long(), > and git_parse_uint() to complement git_parse_ulong(). I am not > enthused by the "nonnegative-int" thing, though. > > Do we have enough cases where we want to use signed type and reserve > negative value for our own internal use (e.g. "unspecified yet")? > If not, a very generic git_config_int() with a caller specific range > check wouldn't look _so_ bad. > > parallel_jobs = git_config_int(var, val); > if (parallel_jobs < 0) > some corrective action; > return 0; And of course, if we _do_ have many callsites where the caller wants a sub-range of the range allowed by the underlying type, we can have <T> git_config_<T>_bounded(var, val, <T> lb, <T> ub) where T are the usual integral types and lb and ub are (inclusive) lower and upper bounds. With that, Jonathan's non-negative-int would fall out as a natural consequence: parallel_jobs = git_config_int_bounded(var, val, 0, INT_MAX); I vaguely recall that Michael Haggerty had a series to add and use helpers to parse values of integral types and something like that interface was suggested in the discussion; and it may even have used a word better than "bounded". -- 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