On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 7:33 AM Derrick Stolee <stolee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 1/29/2020 5:03 PM, Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget wrote:
> > From: Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > dir.c | 3 ++-
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/dir.c b/dir.c
> > index 225f0bc082..ef3307718a 100644
> > --- a/dir.c
> > +++ b/dir.c
> > @@ -1659,7 +1659,7 @@ static enum path_treatment treat_directory(struct dir_struct *dir,
> > const char *dirname, int len, int baselen, int excluded,
> > const struct pathspec *pathspec)
> > {
> > - int nested_repo = 0;
> > + int nested_repo;
> >
> > /* The "len-1" is to strip the final '/' */
> > switch (directory_exists_in_index(istate, dirname, len-1)) {
> > @@ -1670,6 +1670,7 @@ static enum path_treatment treat_directory(struct dir_struct *dir,
> > return path_none;
> >
> > case index_nonexistent:
> > + nested_repo = 0;
>
> I had to look at this code in-full from en/fill-directory-fixes-more to
> be sure that this case was the only use of nested_repo. However, I found
> that this switch statement is unnecessarily complicated. By converting
> the switch to multiple "if" statements, I noticed that the third case
> actually has a "break" statement that can lead to the final "fourth case"
> outside the switch statement.
>
> Hopefully the patch below is a worthy replacement for this one:
>
> -->8--
>
> From b5c04e6e028cb6c7f9e78fbdd2182383d928fe6d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:28:39 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH] dir: refactor treat_directory to clarify variable scope
>
> The nested_repo variable in treat_directory() is created and
> initialized before a multi-case switch statement, but is only
> used by one case. In fact, this switch is very asymmetrical,
> as the first two cases are simple but the third is more
> complicated than the rest of the method.
>
> Extract the switch statement into a series of "if" statements.
> This simplifies the trivial cases, while highlighting the fact
> that a "break" statement in a condition of the third case
> actually leads to jumping to the fourth case (after the switch).
> This assists a reader who provides an initial scan to notice
> there is a second way to approach the "show_other_directories"
> case than simply the response from directory_exists_in_index().
Wait, I'm lost. Wasn't that break statement the only way to get to
the "show_other_directories" block of code after the switch statement?
I can't see where the second way is; am I missing something?
That is, unless directory_exists_in_index() suddenly starts returning
some value other than the three current possibilities. Perhaps we
should throw a BUG() if we get anything other than index_directory,
index_gitdir, or index_nonexistent.
>
> Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> dir.c | 17 ++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dir.c b/dir.c
> index b460211e61..e48812efe6 100644
> --- a/dir.c
> +++ b/dir.c
> @@ -1659,17 +1659,16 @@ static enum path_treatment treat_directory(struct dir_struct *dir,
> const char *dirname, int len, int baselen, int exclude,
> const struct pathspec *pathspec)
> {
> - int nested_repo = 0;
> -
> /* The "len-1" is to strip the final '/' */
> - switch (directory_exists_in_index(istate, dirname, len-1)) {
> - case index_directory:
> - return path_recurse;
> + enum exist_status status = directory_exists_in_index(istate, dirname, len-1);
>
> - case index_gitdir:
> + if (status == index_directory)
> + return path_recurse;
> + if (status == index_gitdir)
> return path_none;
>
> - case index_nonexistent:
> + if (status == index_nonexistent) {
> + int nested_repo = 0;
> if ((dir->flags & DIR_SKIP_NESTED_GIT) ||
> !(dir->flags & DIR_NO_GITLINKS)) {
> struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
> @@ -1682,7 +1681,7 @@ static enum path_treatment treat_directory(struct dir_struct *dir,
> (exclude ? path_excluded : path_untracked));
>
> if (dir->flags & DIR_SHOW_OTHER_DIRECTORIES)
> - break;
> + goto show_other_directories;
> if (exclude &&
> (dir->flags & DIR_SHOW_IGNORED_TOO) &&
> (dir->flags & DIR_SHOW_IGNORED_TOO_MODE_MATCHING)) {
> @@ -1711,7 +1710,7 @@ static enum path_treatment treat_directory(struct dir_struct *dir,
> }
I'd say we'd want to add a BUG("Unhandled value for
directory_exists_in_index: %d\n", status); right here.
>
> /* This is the "show_other_directories" case */
> -
> +show_other_directories:
> if (!(dir->flags & DIR_HIDE_EMPTY_DIRECTORIES))
> return exclude ? path_excluded : path_untracked;
>
> --
> 2.25.0.vfs.1.1
Otherwise, the patch looks good to me and I'll be happy to replace my
patch with this one.
