Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> @@ -3870,6 +4034,20 @@ static int option_parse_unpack_unreachable(const struct option *opt,
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +static int option_parse_cruft_expiration(const struct option *opt,
>> + const char *arg, int unset)
>> +{
>> + if (unset) {
>> + cruft = 0;
>> + cruft_expiration = 0;
>> + } else {
>> + cruft = 1;
>> + if (arg)
>> + cruft_expiration = approxidate(arg);
>> + }
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>
> It is somewhat sad that we have to invent this function, instead of
> using parse_opt_expiry_date_cb().
I failed to mention that this one does more than the bog-standard
callback so the latter cannot be reused as-is, and that is what I
meant by "somewhat sad". If we can find a way to reuse the
parse_opt_expiry_date_cb() for the purpose of the user of this
function that would be ideal, but only if we can do so without
making the caller too unnatural. Having two separate values, "did
we get --cruft-expiration option?" and "what's the value of it?",
does benefit the current caller and we do not want to twist it just
for not adding a similar callback---that's a tail wagging a dog.
Thanks.
