On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 11:53:40PM +0000, Nunley, Nicholas D wrote:
> > > @@ -5390,7 +5438,19 @@ static int do_perqueue(struct cmd_context *ctx)
> > > if (i < 0)
> > > exit_bad_args();
> > >
> > > - /* no sub_command support yet */
> > > + if (strstr(args[i].opts, "--show-coalesce") != NULL) {
> >
> > Comparing args[i].func to do_gcoalesce might be easier.
>
> This is the one comment where I think it's better to leave the code as it is.
> To me is seems more confusing to match on a function pointer that we're never
> going to call. Unless there are more objections I'd rather keep it the way it
> is.
No problem. This is not a code where performance is crucial. In theory,
you could get into trouble if someone introduces another command
(allowing per queue settings) with name like "--show-coalesce-foo" but
that's not very likely, IMHO.
Michal Kubecek
