Tanay Abhra <tanay...@gmail.com> writes:

> On 7/25/2014 7:33 PM, Matthieu Moy wrote:
>> Tanay Abhra <tanay...@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>>> --- a/config.c
>>> +++ b/config.c
>>> @@ -1403,11 +1403,12 @@ const struct string_list 
>>> *git_configset_get_value_multi(struct config_set *cs, c
>>>  
>>>  int git_configset_get_string_const(struct config_set *cs, const char *key, 
>>> const char **dest)
>>>  {
>>> -   const char *value;
>>> -   if (!git_configset_get_value(cs, key, &value))
>>> -           return git_config_string(dest, key, value);
>>> -   else
>>> -           return 1;
>>> +   int ret;
>>> +   char *value;
>>> +   ret = git_configset_get_string(cs, key, &value);
>>> +   if (ret <= 0)
>>> +           *dest = (const char*)value;
>>> +   return ret;
>>>  }
>> 
>> Isn't this a fixup meant for another series?
>>
>
> Though v12 is in pu, Junio commented that git_configset_get_string_const() &
> git_configset_get_string() can be done more concisely, I was trying to do
> that but I failed.

My comment on that version was not about conciseness.  You had one
that called git_config_string() to let the callee do the nonbool
error handling and xstrdup() of the non-error return value, and the
other one that did exactly what a call to git_config_string() would
have done.  That is being redundant, not just failing to be concise.

I was actually hoping that we would see just

int git_configset_get_string(struct config_set *cs, const char *key, char 
**dest)
{
        return git_configset_get_string_const(cs, key, (const char **)dest);
}

with the implementation of _const() variant be the one from v12.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to