list mirror (unofficial, one of many)
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Оля Тележная  <>
To: Martin Ågren <>
Cc: git <>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] ref-filter: remove printing from formatting logic
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:44:02 +0300
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

2018-03-13 22:26 GMT+03:00 Martin Ågren <>:
> Hi Olga
> On 13 March 2018 at 11:25, Оля Тележная <> wrote:
>> The main idea of the patch is, if you want to format the output by
>> ref-filter, you should have an ability to work with errors by yourself
>> if you want to.
>> So I decided not to touch signature of show_ref_array_item(), but to
>> move all printing (I mean errors) to it. So that we could invoke
>> format_ref_array_item() and be sure that we cold handle errors by
>> ourselves.
>> The patch is not finished, but I decided to show it to you. There are
>> still many places where we could die in the middle of formatting
>> process. But, if you like the general idea, I will finish and re-send
>> it.
>> Another question is about verify_ref_format(). Do we need to allow its
>> users also to manage errors by themselves? I left the old scenario,
>> printing everything in verify_ref_format() and die. If you have better
>> ideas, please share them.
> I think it is a good idea to stop die-ing in "libgit". This seems like a
> good way of achieving that, or isolating the issue. Do you have any
> particular use-case for this, i.e., are you setting up the stage for a
> patch "5" where you add a new user of one of these?

Yes, I want to reuse formatting part in cat-file command. In cat-file
sometimes we have an error but we want to continue our work and check
all other sha1s. But, anyway, I find these changes useful not only for

> I do wonder whether a helper function to call strbuf_addstr() and return
> -1 would be a good idea though. I mentioned it in patch 2, then with
> patches 3 and 4, it started to seem like a reasonably good idea. It
> would be a shame if this sort of "boilerplate" for handling errors could
> have an impact on code clarity / obviousness.

I am also not sure if the code will be intuitive enough.

> Another issue is whether passing NULL for an error-strbuf should be a
> way of saying "I don't care; die() so I do not have to". Well, right now
> I guess passing NULL would indeed terminate the program. ;-) Such a
> construct might be another reason for providing error_strbuf_addstr()...
> Of course, it also means we keep die-ing in libgit..
> I feel I'm just talking out loud. Maybe you find my input useful.

I do so! Thanks a lot.
I fixed all that you mentioned, you could find new code here if you want:
I will not re-send it to the mailing list now. I want to finish the
patch at first, there are still some die() calls.
If anyone has other thoughts or ideas - please share them.

> Martin

      reply index

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-13 10:25 Оля Тележная
2018-03-13 19:26 ` Martin Ågren
2018-03-14 13:44   ` Оля Тележная [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

  List information:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link list mirror (unofficial, one of many)

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror
	git clone --mirror http://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/git
	git clone --mirror http://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/git
	git clone --mirror http://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/git

Newsgroups are available over NNTP:

 note: .onion URLs require Tor:

AGPL code for this site: git clone public-inbox