Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>> @@ -1104,6 +1106,7 @@ int git_config_from_buf(config_fn_t fn, const char *name, const char *buf,
>> top.u.buf.buf = buf;
>> top.u.buf.len = len;
>> top.u.buf.pos = 0;
>> + top.type = "blob";
>> top.name = name;
>> top.path = NULL;
>> top.die_on_error = 0;
>
> This function is about reading config from a memory buffer. The only reason
> we do so _now_ is when reading from a blob, but I think it is laying a
> trap for somebody who wants to reuse the function later.
>
> Should git_config_from_buf() take a "type" parameter, and
> git_config_from_blob_sha1() pass in "blob"?
I think that is sensible. I think s/from_buf/from_mem/ may also be
sensible (it would match the naming used in the index_{fd,mem,...}
functions in he hashing code).
>> static int git_config_from_stdin(config_fn_t fn, void *data)
>> {
>> - return do_config_from_file(fn, "<stdin>", NULL, stdin, data);
>> + return do_config_from_file(fn, NULL, NULL, stdin, data);
>> }
>
> Likewise here, we make assumptions in do_config_from_file() about what
> the NULL path means. I think this is less likely to be a problem than
> the other case, but it seems like it would be cleaner for "file" or
> "stdin" to come from the caller, which knows for sure what we are doing.
Makes sense.
> Similarly, I think git_config_from_stdin() can simply pass in an empty
> name rather than NULL to avoid do_config_from_file() having to fix it
> up.
This too.
>> +test_expect_success 'invalid stdin config' '
>> + echo "fatal: bad config line 1 in stdin " >expect &&
>> + echo "[broken" | test_must_fail git config --list --file - >output 2>&1 &&
>> + test_cmp expect output
>> +'
>
> The original would have been "bad config file line 1 in <stdin>"; I
> think this is an improvement to drop the "file" here.
>
> -Peff
--
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