"ZheNing Hu via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> From: ZheNing Hu <adlternative@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Let `populate_value()`, `get_ref_atom_value()` and
> `format_ref_array_item()` get the return value of `get_object()`
> correctly.
The "get" the value correctly, I think. What you are teaching them
is to pass the return value from get_object() through the callchain
to their callers.
The readers will be helped if you say what kind of errors
get_object() wants to tell its callers, not just "-1" is for error,
which is what populate_value() assumes to be sufficient. In other
words, which non-zero returns from get_object() are interesting and
why?
> @@ -1997,9 +1997,11 @@ static int populate_value(struct ref_array_item *ref, struct strbuf *err)
> static int get_ref_atom_value(struct ref_array_item *ref, int atom,
> struct atom_value **v, struct strbuf *err)
> {
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> if (!ref->value) {
> - if (populate_value(ref, err))
> - return -1;
> + if ((ret = populate_value(ref, err)))
> + return ret;
The new variable only needs to be in this scope, and does not have
to be shown to the entire function.
> @@ -2573,6 +2575,7 @@ int format_ref_array_item(struct ref_array_item *info,
> {
> const char *cp, *sp, *ep;
> struct ref_formatting_state state = REF_FORMATTING_STATE_INIT;
> + int ret = 0;
This is dubious...
> state.quote_style = format->quote_style;
> push_stack_element(&state.stack);
> @@ -2585,10 +2588,10 @@ int format_ref_array_item(struct ref_array_item *info,
> if (cp < sp)
> append_literal(cp, sp, &state);
> pos = parse_ref_filter_atom(format, sp + 2, ep, error_buf);
> - if (pos < 0 || get_ref_atom_value(info, pos, &atomv, error_buf) ||
> + if (pos < 0 || (ret = get_ref_atom_value(info, pos, &atomv, error_buf)) ||
Here, if "ret" gets assigned any non-zero value, the condition is
satisfied, and ...
> atomv->handler(atomv, &state, error_buf)) {
> pop_stack_element(&state.stack);
> - return -1;
> + return ret ? ret : -1;
... the control flow will leave this function. Therefore, ...
> }
> }
> if (*cp) {
> @@ -2610,7 +2613,7 @@ int format_ref_array_item(struct ref_array_item *info,
> }
> strbuf_addbuf(final_buf, &state.stack->output);
> pop_stack_element(&state.stack);
> - return 0;
> + return ret;
... at this point, "ret" can never be anything other than zero. Am
I misreading the patch?
If I am not misreading the patch, then "ret" does not have to be
globally visible in this function---it can have the same scope as
"pos".
> }
>
> void pretty_print_ref(const char *name, const struct object_id *oid,
