SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> struct option builtin_sparse_checkout_options[] = {
>> OPT_SUBCOMMAND("list", &fn, sparse_checkout_list),
>> OPT_SUBCOMMAND("init", &fn, sparse_checkout_init),
>> OPT_SUBCOMMAND("set", &fn, sparse_checkout_set),
>> OPT_SUBCOMMAND("add", &fn, sparse_checkout_add),
>> OPT_SUBCOMMAND("reapply", &fn, sparse_checkout_reapply),
>> OPT_SUBCOMMAND("disable", &fn, sparse_checkout_disable),
>> OPT_END(),
>> };
>>
>> yet we have to sprinkle setup_work_tree() to all of these functions'
>> implementation. If we were able to describe which selected ones do
>> not need the setup call, we could let the parse-options API to look
>> up the function and then before calling "fn" we could make the setup
>> call. That would allow us to maintain the subcommands much nicely.
>
> It's easy enough to do in this particular case: there is an
> OPT_SUBCOMMAND_F() variant which takes an additional flags parameter,
> so we could add a PARSE_OPT_SETUP_WORK_TREE flag, check it in e.g.
> parse_subcommand(), and act accordingly if it's set.
>
> However, this wouldn't work when the command has a default operation
> mode and is invoked without any subcommands. And I'm not sure about
> doing this in parse-options, because it's about, well, parsing
> options, not about doing fancy setup stuff.
Yes, exactly. What I was imagining was more along the lines of
parse_opt_subcommand_fn *fn = NULL;
parse_opt_subcommand_fn *fn_with_setup = NULL;
options[] = {
OPT_SUBCOMMAND("list", &fn_with_setup, sparse_checkout_list),
...
OPT_SUBCOMMAND("check-rules", &fn, sparse_check_rules),
};
parse_options(...);
if (fn_with_setup) {
setup_worktree();
fn = fn_with_setup;
}
fn(...);
But of course as a "safety" measure, one options[] array can all
point at the same "fn" variable or parse_options() becomes unhappy,
so the above does not work out of the box.
