Hi,
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> +static char *
> +prepare_index(const char **files, const char *prefix)
> +{
> + int fd;
> + struct tree *tree;
> + struct lock_file *next_index_lock;
> +
> + fd = hold_locked_index(&lock_file, 1);
> + if (read_cache() < 0)
> + die("index file corrupt");
> +
> + if (all) {
> + add_files_to_cache(verbose, NULL, files);
> + if (write_cache(fd, active_cache, active_nr) || close(fd))
> + die("unable to write new_index file");
> + return lock_file.filename;
> + } else if (also) {
> + add_files_to_cache(verbose, prefix, files);
> + if (write_cache(fd, active_cache, active_nr) || close(fd))
> + die("unable to write new_index file");
> + return lock_file.filename;
> + }
Unless something slips by my mind, this could be written as
if (all || also) {
add_files_to_cache(verbose, also ? prefix : NULL, files);
...
}
> +
> + if (interactive)
> + interactive_add();
> +
> + if (*files == NULL) {
> + /* Commit index as-is. */
> + rollback_lock_file(&lock_file);
> + return get_index_file();
> + }
Would an interactive add not conflict with this rollback? And indeed with
the locked index to begin with?
> + /* update the user index file */
> + add_files_to_cache(verbose, prefix, files);
> + if (write_cache(fd, active_cache, active_nr) || close(fd))
> + die("unable to write new_index file");
Does that mean that the index is _always_ written? Even when not
specifying and paths on the command line?
> + /* Uh oh, abusing lock_file to create a garbage collected file */
It's not that bad. But I would mention that it is a temporary index which
you are building.
> +static const char sign_off_header[] = "Signed-off-by: ";
Funny, I thought it was a footer ;-)
> + } else if (!stat(template_file, &statbuf)) {
Should this not test "if (template_file && " first?
> +/* Find out if the message starting at position 'start' in the strbuf
> + * contains only whitespace and Signed-off-by lines. */
> +static int message_is_empty(struct strbuf *sb, int start)
> +{
> + struct strbuf tmpl;
> + const char *nl;
> + int eol, i;
> +
> + /* See if the template is just a prefix of the message. */
> + strbuf_init(&tmpl, 0);
> + if (template_file && strbuf_read_file(&tmpl, template_file, 0) > 0) {
> + stripspace(&tmpl, 1);
> + if (start + tmpl.len <= sb->len &&
> + memcmp(tmpl.buf, sb->buf + start, tmpl.len) == 0)
> + start += tmpl.len;
> + }
> + strbuf_release(&tmpl);
The release could go inside the if block, no?
> +static int run_hook(const char *index_file, const char *name, const char *arg)
Would this function not prefer to live in run-command.c?
> +{
> + struct child_process hook;
> + const char *argv[3], *env[2];
> + char index[PATH_MAX];
> +
> + argv[0] = git_path("hooks/%s", name);
> + argv[1] = arg;
> + argv[2] = NULL;
> + snprintf(index, sizeof(index), "GIT_INDEX_FILE=%s", index_file);
> + env[0] = index;
> + env[1] = NULL;
> +
> + if (access(argv[0], X_OK) < 0)
> + return 0;
That check logically belongs 6 lines higher...
> + rev.abbrev = 0;
> + rev.diff = 1;
> + rev.diffopt.output_format =
> + DIFF_FORMAT_SHORTSTAT | DIFF_FORMAT_SUMMARY;
> +
> + rev.verbose_header = 1;
> + rev.show_root_diff = 1;
> + rev.commit_format = get_commit_format("format:%h: %s");
That's interesting. Wouldn't have thought of that. Reusing the log_tree
machinery to output the summary. Cute.
Note that one relatively low-hanging fruit will be to teach builtin-commit
to use a cheaper "no changes?" check when no_edit = 1.
Thanks,
Dscho
