On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 15:37 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > + if (defined $to_cmd) {
> > + open(F, "$to_cmd \Q$t\E |")
> > + or die "(to-cmd) Could not execute '$to_cmd'";
> > + while(<F>) {
> > + my $t = $_;
>
> "my $t" masks another $t in the outer scope; technically not a bug, but
> questionable as a style.
>
> > + $t =~ s/^\s*//g;
> > + $t =~ s/\n$//g;
> > + next if ($t eq $sender and $suppress_from);
> > + push @to, parse_address_line($t)
> > + if defined $t; # sanitized/validated later
>
> This "if defined $t" makes my head hurt. Why?
>
> * The "while (<F>)" loop wouldn't have given you an undef in $t in the
> first place;
>
> * You would have got "Use of uninitialized value" warning at these two
> s/// statements if $t were undef; and
>
> * Even if $t were undef, these two s/// statements would have made $t a
> defined, empty string.
all true.
> > + printf("(to-cmd) Adding To: %s from: '%s'\n",
> > + $t, $to_cmd) unless $quiet;
> > + }
> > + close F
> > + or die "(to-cmd) failed to close pipe to '$to_cmd'";
> > + }
>
> In any case, this whole codeblock obviously is a copy-and-paste from
> corresponding $cc_cmd codepath, and I wonder if you can refactor the
> original into a common helper function first and then use it to make the
> addition of this feature a smaller patch.
>
> if (defined $cc_cmd) {
> push @cc, recipients_cmd($cc_cmd, 'cc');
> }
> if (defined $to_cmd) {
> push @to, recipients_cmd($to_cmd, 'to');
> }
Overall, I believe it'll be more code, but all right.
> If you did so, the first patch that refactors to create a helper function
> can address issues Ãvar raised in the review to clean things up, no?
> I notice that you use parse_address_line() while $cc_cmd codepath doesn't.
> I haven't studied other codepaths deeply, but my gut feeling is that the
> reason why the $cc_cmd codepath does not call parse_address_line() before
> pushing the result to @cc is _not_ because strings on @cc shouldn't be
> sanitized (the codepath to parse "Cc: " calls parse_address_line and
> pushes the result to @cc), but because the code is simply sloppy.
Probably, I wrote some of those lines...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
