Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes:
>
>>> +int fetch_pack_fsck_objects(void)
>>> +{
>>> + fetch_pack_setup();
>>> +
>>> + return fetch_fsck_objects >= 0
>>> + ? fetch_fsck_objects
>>> + : transfer_fsck_objects >= 0
>>> + ? transfer_fsck_objects
>>> + : 0;
>>> +}
>>
>> ... can we maybe rewrite it to something more customary here? The
>> following is way easier to read, at least for me.
>>
>> int fetch_pack_fsck_objects(void)
>> {
>> fetch_pack_setup();
>> if (fetch_fsck_objects >= 0 ||
>> transfer_fsck_objects >= 0)
>> return 1;
>> return 0;
>> }
>
> But do they mean the same thing? In a repository where
>
> [fetch] fsckobjects = no
>
> is set, no matter what transfer.fsckobjects says (or left unspecified),
> we want to return "no, we are not doing fsck".
The original before it was made into a helper function was written
as a cascade of ?: operators, because it had to be a single
expression. As the body of a helper function, we now can sprinkle
multiple return statements in it. I think the way that is easiest
to understand is
/* the most specific, if specified */
if (fetch_fsck_objects >= 0)
return fetch_fsck_objects;
/* the less specific, catch-all for both directions */
if (transfer_fsck_objects >= 0)
return transfer_fsck_objects;
/* the fallback hardcoded default */
return 0;
without the /* comments */.
