Stefan Beller <[email protected]> writes:
> The information that is printed for update_submodules in
> 'submodule--helper update-clone' and consumed by 'git submodule update'
> is stored as a string per submodule. This made sense at the time of
> 48308681b07 (git submodule update: have a dedicated helper for cloning,
> 2016-02-29), but as we want to migrate the rest of the submodule update
> into C, we're better off having access to the raw information in a helper
> struct.
The reasoning above makes sense, but I have a few niggles on the
naming.
* Anything you'd place to keep track of the state is "information",
so a whole "_information" suffix to the structure name does not
add much value. We've seen our fair share of (meaningless)
"_data" suffix used in many places but I think the overly long
"_information" that is equally meaningless trumps them. I think
we also have "_info", but if we are not going to have a beter
name, let's not be original and stick to "_data" like other
existing codepath. An alternative with more meaningful name is
of course better, though, but it is not all that much worth to
spend too many braincycles on it.
* Is the fact that these parameters necessary to help populating
the submodule repository are sent on a line to external process
the most important aspect of the submodule_lines[] array? As
this step is a preparation to migrate out of that line/text
oriented IPC, I think line-ness is the least important and
interesting thing to name the variable with.
If I were writing this patch, perhaps I'd do
struct update_clone_data *update_clone;
int update_clone_nr, update_clone_alloc;
following my gut, but since you've been thinking about submodule
longer than I have, perhaps you can come up with a better name.
> @@ -1463,8 +1469,9 @@ struct submodule_update_clone {
> const char *recursive_prefix;
> const char *prefix;
>
> - /* Machine-readable status lines to be consumed by git-submodule.sh */
> - struct string_list projectlines;
> + /* to be consumed by git-submodule.sh */
> + struct submodule_update_clone_information *submodule_lines;
> + int submodule_lines_nr; int submodule_lines_alloc;
>
> /* If we want to stop as fast as possible and return an error */
> unsigned quickstop : 1;
> @@ -1478,7 +1485,7 @@ struct submodule_update_clone {
> #define SUBMODULE_UPDATE_CLONE_INIT {0, MODULE_LIST_INIT, 0, \
> SUBMODULE_UPDATE_STRATEGY_INIT, 0, 0, -1, STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, 0, \
> NULL, NULL, NULL, \
> - STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, 0, NULL, 0, 0}
> + NULL, 0, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0, 0}
The structure definition and this macro definition are nearby, so it
is not crucial, but its probably not a bad idea to switch to C99
initializers for a thing like this to make it more readable, once
the code around this area stabilizes back again sufficiently (IOW,
let's not distract ourselves in the middle of adding a new feature
like this one).
