From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF33E1FD99 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 17:19:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752839AbcHZRTw (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:19:52 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:60129 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751321AbcHZRTv (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:19:51 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BE4537321; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:15:44 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=2Qhtwxn5BdlR2sjKaWRdy22B1fs=; b=XMiXHP Uh2AoZk7WeWKPrv5aUQC2KFLCiDB4/PCAZ7b4JAKxAvrsH584DCiQB4KnZsxnzRT YJolQGwh8UALutdXBt8CDP8bNeVzzy/0yJ0zDTLe1SZ8y8B0t4XnZnfpqjSScqmQ USmvrKuaqv2pHWVjF66zWyVAwBl05BfE5AK14= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=wbSAN9HZILwJ3C59PhqQB8XpnB4HQIS7 pbaKzoByogXiBnkU3PcKceHOHCuEQwOeUV6BP+GmziiWthC9OvBXJZHhuZPTm2D0 YHxq88FO+RGl92V1A5fnMvi4dNkB04DrlQIDReiUsLg0n7PuyiNIROgKlV3bUhU0 J5aMCFUIYAo= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933B037320; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:15:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1D3623731F; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:15:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Lars Schneider Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, peff@peff.net, sbeller@google.com, Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de, jnareb@gmail.com, mlbright@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 05/13] pkt-line: add packet_write_gently() References: <20160825110752.31581-1-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <20160825110752.31581-6-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <0BD3A97F-A9FD-45A6-AF82-E01CC6B9BA89@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 10:15:42 -0700 In-Reply-To: <0BD3A97F-A9FD-45A6-AF82-E01CC6B9BA89@gmail.com> (Lars Schneider's message of "Fri, 26 Aug 2016 11:40:44 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: B8E78A26-6BB0-11E6-BC26-F7BB12518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Lars Schneider writes: >> Do you anticipate future need of non-gently variant of this >> function? If so, perhaps a helper that takes a boolean "am I >> working for the gently variant?" may help share more code. > > With helper you mean "an additional boolean parameter"? I don't > see a need for a non-gently variant right now but I will > add this parameter if you think it is a good idea. How would the > signature look like? > > int packet_write_gently(const int fd_out, const char *buf, size_t size, int gentle) > > This would follow type_from_string_gently() in object.h. I actually imagined it would be more like your packet_write_fmt vs packet_write_fmt_gently pair of functions. If you do not have an immediate need for a non-gentle packet_write() right now, but you still forsee that it is likely some other caller may want one, you could still prepare for it by doing a static packet_write_1((const int fd_out, const char *buf, size_t size, int gentle) and make packet_write_gently() call it with gentle=1, without actually introducing packet_write() nobody yet calls.