On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 09:41:28AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > + /*
> > + * Function called when a client requests the capability as a
> > + * non-command. This may be NULL if the capability does nothing.
> > + *
> > + * For a capability of the form "foo=bar", the value string points to
> > + * the content after the "=" (i.e., "bar"). For simple capabilities
> > + * (just "foo"), it is NULL.
> > + */
> > + void (*receive)(struct repository *r, const char *value);
>
> What does "as a non-command" mean? To put it another way, when a
> client requests the capability as a command, what does the receive
> method do differently?
For each entry in this capability table, clients can say:
command=foo
or just:
foo
The latter is a non-command. The "receive" function is not called at all
if it is a "command". I think this is a bit more clear when read
together with the existing function just above (which you can't see in
the diff context):
/*
* Function called when a client requests the capability as a command.
* Will be provided a struct packet_reader 'request' which it should
* use to read the command specific part of the request. Every command
* MUST read until a flush packet is seen before sending a response.
*
* This field should be NULL for capabilities which are not commands.
*/
int (*command)(struct repository *r, struct packet_reader *request);
I guess these could define "as a command", but I think it's pretty clear
in the context.
> > static int parse_command(const char *key, struct protocol_capability **command)
> > @@ -262,7 +277,7 @@ static int process_request(void)
> > case PACKET_READ_NORMAL:
> > /* collect request; a sequence of keys and values */
>
> The comment tentatively gets slightly stale here, but that will be
> corrected at the end, so it would be fine ;-)
Hmm. I think it is not stale here, as we are still collecting the "keys"
strvec. But it _does_ get stale by the end, when we stop doing so.
I'm preparing a re-roll for the test issues Eric noted, so I'll drop
that comment in the appropriate patch.
-Peff
