"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-maintenance.txt b/Documentation/git-maintenance.txt
> index 35b0be7d40..9204762e21 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-maintenance.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-maintenance.txt
> @@ -73,6 +73,10 @@ OPTIONS
> --quiet::
> Do not report progress or other information over `stderr`.
>
> +--task=<task>::
> + If this option is specified one or more times, then only run the
> + specified tasks in the specified order.
> +
> GIT
> ---
> Part of the linkgit:git[1] suite
> diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c
> index 2cd17398ec..c58dea6fa5 100644
> --- a/builtin/gc.c
> +++ b/builtin/gc.c
> @@ -710,6 +710,7 @@ static const char * const builtin_maintenance_usage[] = {
> static struct maintenance_opts {
> int auto_flag;
> int quiet;
> + int tasks_selected;
> } opts;
>
> static int run_write_commit_graph(void)
> @@ -804,20 +805,38 @@ typedef int maintenance_task_fn(void);
> struct maintenance_task {
> const char *name;
> maintenance_task_fn *fn;
> - unsigned enabled:1;
> + int task_order;
> + unsigned enabled:1,
> + selected:1;
> };
>
> static struct maintenance_task *tasks[MAX_NUM_TASKS];
> static int num_tasks;
>
> +static int compare_tasks_by_selection(const void *a_, const void *b_)
> +{
> + const struct maintenance_task *a, *b;
> + a = (const struct maintenance_task *)a_;
> + b = (const struct maintenance_task *)b_;
> +
> + return b->task_order - a->task_order;
> +}
It forces the reader to know intimately that task_order *is*
selection order in order to understand why this is "tasks by
selection". Perhaps rename the field to match what it is
(i.e. "selection_order")?
> static int maintenance_run(void)
> {
> int i;
> int result = 0;
>
> + if (opts.tasks_selected)
> + QSORT(tasks, num_tasks, compare_tasks_by_selection);
> +
> for (i = 0; !result && i < num_tasks; i++) {
> - if (!tasks[i]->enabled)
> + if (opts.tasks_selected && !tasks[i]->selected)
> + continue;
> +
> + if (!opts.tasks_selected && !tasks[i]->enabled)
> continue;
I am not sure about this. Even if the task <x> is disabled, if the
user says --task=<x>, it is run anyway? Doesn't make an immediate
sense to me.
As I am bad at deciphering de Morgan, I'd find it easier to read if
the first were written more like so:
if (!(!opts.tasks_selected || tasks[i]->selected))
continue;
That is, "do not skip any when not limited, and do not skip the ones
that are selected when limited". And that would easily extend to
if (!tasks[i]->enabled ||
!(!opts.tasks_selected || tasks[i]->selected))
continue;
> +
> result = tasks[i]->fn();
> }
> @@ -842,6 +861,44 @@ static void initialize_tasks(void)
> num_tasks++;
> }
>
> +static int task_option_parse(const struct option *opt,
> + const char *arg, int unset)
> +{
> + int i;
> + struct maintenance_task *task = NULL;
> +
> + BUG_ON_OPT_NEG(unset);
> +
> + if (!arg || !strlen(arg)) {
> + error(_("--task requires a value"));
> + return 1;
There is no need to special case an empty string that was explicitly
given as the value---it will be caught as "'' is not a valid task".
> + }
> +
> + opts.tasks_selected++;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUM_TASKS; i++) {
> + if (tasks[i] && !strcasecmp(tasks[i]->name, arg)) {
> + task = tasks[i];
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (!task) {
> + error(_("'%s' is not a valid task"), arg);
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + if (task->selected) {
> + error(_("task '%s' cannot be selected multiple times"), arg);
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + task->selected = 1;
> + task->task_order = opts.tasks_selected;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
