Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> > +static long parse_empty_value(const char *value)
>> > +{
>> > + if (!value)
>> > + return EMPTY_UNSPECIFIED;
>> > + else if (!strcasecmp(value, "drop"))
>> > + return EMPTY_DROP;
>> > + else if (!strcasecmp(value, "keep"))
>> > + return EMPTY_KEEP;
>> > + else if (!strcasecmp(value, "ask"))
>> > + return EMPTY_ASK;
>>
>> Not an error but just silently ignored?
>
> Oops, I'll switch it to an error.
Not necessarily (see "Ahh, OK" below).
>> > + return EMPTY_UNSPECIFIED;
>> > +}
>> > +
>>
>> > +static int parse_opt_empty(const struct option *opt, const char *arg, int unset)
>> > +{
>> > + struct rebase_options *options = opt->value;
>> > + long value = parse_empty_value(arg);
>>
>> Ahh, OK.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be better to make the variable and the parsing helper
>> function of type "enum empty_type", not "long", just like the field
>> in the rebase_options struct?
>
> Indeed, I'll fix this up.
Thanks. I was wondering if there is something subtle I didn't see
going on around here.
