Re: [PATCH v1 23/45] check-ignore: convert to use parse_pathspec

2013-04-15 Thread Adam Spiers 
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 09:48:22AM +1000, Duy Nguyen wrote:
 On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Adam Spiers g...@adamspiers.org wrote:
   The introduction of argc also makes it possible to invoke
   check_ignore() with arguments which are not self-consistent.
 
  This is the same problem with main()
 
  How could main() be invoked with argc inconsistent with argv?
 
 The point is main's caller has to maintain the consistency. So do
 check_ignore's callers.

But only the system runtime calls main(), right?  So we can probably
rely on it being called in a consistent manner ;-)
--
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

Re: [PATCH v1 23/45] check-ignore: convert to use parse_pathspec

2013-04-14 Thread Adam Spiers 
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 09:09:33AM +1000, Duy Nguyen wrote:
 On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Adam Spiers g...@adamspiers.org wrote:
  -static int check_ignore(const char *prefix, const char **pathspec)
  +static int check_ignore(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
   {
struct dir_struct dir;
  - const char *path, *full_path;
char *seen;
int num_ignored = 0, dtype = DT_UNKNOWN, i;
struct path_exclude_check check;
struct exclude *exclude;
  + struct pathspec pathspec;
 
/* read_cache() is only necessary so we can watch out for 
  submodules. */
if (read_cache()  0)
  @@ -70,31 +70,39 @@ static int check_ignore(const char *prefix, const char 
  **pathspec)
dir.flags |= DIR_COLLECT_IGNORED;
setup_standard_excludes(dir);
 
  - if (!pathspec || !*pathspec) {
  + if (!argc) {
 
  Is there a compelling reason for introducing argc as a new parameter
  to check_ignore(), other than simplifying the above line?  And why
  rename the pathspec parameter to argv?  Both these changes are
  misleading AFAICS, since paths provided to check_ignore() can come
  from sources other than CLI arguments (i.e. via --stdin).
 
 Because I introduced struct pathspec pathspec; I need to rename the
 argument pathspec to something else.

Ah, I see - that makes sense :-)

 Maybe we could rename the argument to paths?

Sounds fine to me.

  The introduction of argc also makes it possible to invoke
  check_ignore() with arguments which are not self-consistent.
 
 This is the same problem with main()

How could main() be invoked with argc inconsistent with argv?

 and other places that follow this convention.  But I don't mind
 dropping argc either.

What is the reason for that convention?  I'm willing to be persuaded
either way.
--
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

Re: [PATCH v1 23/45] check-ignore: convert to use parse_pathspec

2013-04-14 Thread Duy Nguyen 
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Adam Spiers g...@adamspiers.org wrote:
  The introduction of argc also makes it possible to invoke
  check_ignore() with arguments which are not self-consistent.

 This is the same problem with main()

 How could main() be invoked with argc inconsistent with argv?

The point is main's caller has to maintain the consistency. So do
check_ignore's callers.
-- 
Duy
--
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

Re: [PATCH v1 23/45] check-ignore: convert to use parse_pathspec

2013-04-12 Thread Adam Spiers 
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 01:06:38PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
 check-ignore (at least the test suite) seems to rely on the pattern
 order. PATHSPEC_KEEP_ORDER is introduced to explictly express this.
 The lack of PATHSPEC_MAXDEPTH_VALID is sufficient because it's the
 only flag that reorders pathspecs, but it's less obvious that way.

Sorry for the slow response - I only just noticed this today.  (It
would be useful if any future patches to check-ignore Cc: me
explicitly, to catch my mail filters.)

 Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy pclo...@gmail.com
 ---
  builtin/check-ignore.c | 34 +-
  pathspec.c |  6 +-
  pathspec.h |  1 +
  t/t0008-ignores.sh |  8 
  4 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
 
 diff --git a/builtin/check-ignore.c b/builtin/check-ignore.c
 index 0240f99..6e55f06 100644
 --- a/builtin/check-ignore.c
 +++ b/builtin/check-ignore.c
 @@ -53,14 +53,14 @@ static void output_exclude(const char *path, struct 
 exclude *exclude)
   }
  }
  
 -static int check_ignore(const char *prefix, const char **pathspec)
 +static int check_ignore(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
  {
   struct dir_struct dir;
 - const char *path, *full_path;
   char *seen;
   int num_ignored = 0, dtype = DT_UNKNOWN, i;
   struct path_exclude_check check;
   struct exclude *exclude;
 + struct pathspec pathspec;
  
   /* read_cache() is only necessary so we can watch out for submodules. */
   if (read_cache()  0)
 @@ -70,31 +70,39 @@ static int check_ignore(const char *prefix, const char 
 **pathspec)
   dir.flags |= DIR_COLLECT_IGNORED;
   setup_standard_excludes(dir);
  
 - if (!pathspec || !*pathspec) {
 + if (!argc) {

Is there a compelling reason for introducing argc as a new parameter
to check_ignore(), other than simplifying the above line?  And why
rename the pathspec parameter to argv?  Both these changes are
misleading AFAICS, since paths provided to check_ignore() can come
from sources other than CLI arguments (i.e. via --stdin).  

The introduction of argc also makes it possible to invoke
check_ignore() with arguments which are not self-consistent.

I haven't been following your pathspec work, but FWIW the other
changes in this patch look reasonable at a glance.

Thanks,
Adam
--
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

Re: [PATCH v1 23/45] check-ignore: convert to use parse_pathspec

2013-04-12 Thread Duy Nguyen 
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Adam Spiers g...@adamspiers.org wrote:
 -static int check_ignore(const char *prefix, const char **pathspec)
 +static int check_ignore(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
  {
   struct dir_struct dir;
 - const char *path, *full_path;
   char *seen;
   int num_ignored = 0, dtype = DT_UNKNOWN, i;
   struct path_exclude_check check;
   struct exclude *exclude;
 + struct pathspec pathspec;

   /* read_cache() is only necessary so we can watch out for submodules. 
 */
   if (read_cache()  0)
 @@ -70,31 +70,39 @@ static int check_ignore(const char *prefix, const char 
 **pathspec)
   dir.flags |= DIR_COLLECT_IGNORED;
   setup_standard_excludes(dir);

 - if (!pathspec || !*pathspec) {
 + if (!argc) {

 Is there a compelling reason for introducing argc as a new parameter
 to check_ignore(), other than simplifying the above line?  And why
 rename the pathspec parameter to argv?  Both these changes are
 misleading AFAICS, since paths provided to check_ignore() can come
 from sources other than CLI arguments (i.e. via --stdin).

Because I introduced struct pathspec pathspec; I need to rename the
argument pathspec to something else. Maybe we could rename the
argument to paths?

 The introduction of argc also makes it possible to invoke
 check_ignore() with arguments which are not self-consistent.

This is the same problem with main() and other places that follow this
convention. But I don't mind dropping argc either.
-- 
Duy
--
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

[PATCH v1 23/45] check-ignore: convert to use parse_pathspec

2013-03-15 Thread Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy 
check-ignore (at least the test suite) seems to rely on the pattern
order. PATHSPEC_KEEP_ORDER is introduced to explictly express this.
The lack of PATHSPEC_MAXDEPTH_VALID is sufficient because it's the
only flag that reorders pathspecs, but it's less obvious that way.

Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy pclo...@gmail.com
---
 builtin/check-ignore.c | 34 +-
 pathspec.c |  6 +-
 pathspec.h |  1 +
 t/t0008-ignores.sh |  8 
 4 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/builtin/check-ignore.c b/builtin/check-ignore.c
index 0240f99..6e55f06 100644
--- a/builtin/check-ignore.c
+++ b/builtin/check-ignore.c
@@ -53,14 +53,14 @@ static void output_exclude(const char *path, struct exclude 
*exclude)
}
 }
 
-static int check_ignore(const char *prefix, const char **pathspec)
+static int check_ignore(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
 {
struct dir_struct dir;
-   const char *path, *full_path;
char *seen;
int num_ignored = 0, dtype = DT_UNKNOWN, i;
struct path_exclude_check check;
struct exclude *exclude;
+   struct pathspec pathspec;
 
/* read_cache() is only necessary so we can watch out for submodules. */
if (read_cache()  0)
@@ -70,31 +70,39 @@ static int check_ignore(const char *prefix, const char 
**pathspec)
dir.flags |= DIR_COLLECT_IGNORED;
setup_standard_excludes(dir);
 
-   if (!pathspec || !*pathspec) {
+   if (!argc) {
if (!quiet)
fprintf(stderr, no pathspec given.\n);
return 0;
}
 
+   /*
+* check-ignore just needs paths. Magic beyond :/ is really
+* irrelevant.
+*/
+   parse_pathspec(pathspec,
+  PATHSPEC_ALL_MAGIC  ~PATHSPEC_FROMTOP,
+  PATHSPEC_SYMLINK_LEADING_PATH |
+  PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE |
+  PATHSPEC_KEEP_ORDER,
+  prefix, argv);
+
path_exclude_check_init(check, dir);
/*
 * look for pathspecs matching entries in the index, since these
 * should not be ignored, in order to be consistent with
 * 'git status', 'git add' etc.
 */
-   seen = find_pathspecs_matching_against_index(pathspec);
-   for (i = 0; pathspec[i]; i++) {
-   path = pathspec[i];
-   full_path = prefix_path(prefix, prefix
-   ? strlen(prefix) : 0, path);
-   full_path = check_path_for_gitlink(full_path);
-   die_if_path_beyond_symlink(full_path, prefix);
+   seen = find_pathspecs_matching_against_index(pathspec.raw);
+   for (i = 0; i  pathspec.nr; i++) {
+   const char *full_path = pathspec.raw[i];
if (!seen[i]) {
exclude = last_exclude_matching_path(check, full_path,
 -1, dtype);
if (exclude) {
if (!quiet)
-   output_exclude(path, exclude);
+   
output_exclude(pathspec.items[i].original,
+  exclude);
num_ignored++;
}
}
@@ -129,7 +137,7 @@ static int check_ignore_stdin_paths(const char *prefix)
}
ALLOC_GROW(pathspec, nr + 1, alloc);
pathspec[nr] = NULL;
-   num_ignored = check_ignore(prefix, (const char **)pathspec);
+   num_ignored = check_ignore(nr, (const char **)pathspec, prefix);
maybe_flush_or_die(stdout, attribute to stdout);
strbuf_release(buf);
strbuf_release(nbuf);
@@ -165,7 +173,7 @@ int cmd_check_ignore(int argc, const char **argv, const 
char *prefix)
if (stdin_paths) {
num_ignored = check_ignore_stdin_paths(prefix);
} else {
-   num_ignored = check_ignore(prefix, argv);
+   num_ignored = check_ignore(argc, argv, prefix);
maybe_flush_or_die(stdout, ignore to stdout);
}
 
diff --git a/pathspec.c b/pathspec.c
index 9a57c0c..f531038 100644
--- a/pathspec.c
+++ b/pathspec.c
@@ -368,9 +368,13 @@ void parse_pathspec(struct pathspec *pathspec,
pathspec-magic |= item[i].magic;
}
 
-   if (pathspec-magic  PATHSPEC_MAXDEPTH)
+
+   if (pathspec-magic  PATHSPEC_MAXDEPTH) {
+   if (flags  PATHSPEC_KEEP_ORDER)
+   die(BUG: PATHSPEC_MAXDEPTH_VALID and 
PATHSPEC_KEEP_ORDER are incompatible);
qsort(pathspec-items, pathspec-nr,
  sizeof(struct pathspec_item), pathspec_item_cmp);
+   }
 }
 
 /*
diff --git a/pathspec.h b/pathspec.h
index ed5d3a6..44253c8 100644
--- a/pathspec.h
+++