| Message ID | 3ddffa10278b5814123a5bcd2fd3a531def3ecdc.1641978175.git.dyroneteng@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | ls-tree: "--object-only" and "--format" opts | expand |
On Thu, Jan 13 2022, Teng Long wrote: > "show_tree_data" is a struct that packages the necessary fields for > "show_tree()". This commit is a pre-prepared commit for supporting > "--format" option and it does not affect any existing functionality. Is the only reason this is split off from 9/9 because you're injecting a 8/9 commit for the coccinelle rule change, and wanted to find some logical cut-off between the two? > Signed-off-by: Teng Long <dyroneteng@gmail.com> For both this & 9/9 this seems to mostly/substantially be code I wrote and submitted as part of https://lore.kernel.org/git/RFC-patch-6.7-eac299f06ff-20211217T131635Z-avarab@gmail.com; The convention we use in such cases is to retain the "Author" header and just add your own Signed-off-by to patches you're modifying/splitting up.
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 3:07 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> wrote: > > "show_tree_data" is a struct that packages the necessary fields for > > "show_tree()". This commit is a pre-prepared commit for supporting > > "--format" option and it does not affect any existing functionality. > > Is the only reason this is split off from 9/9 because you're injecting a > 8/9 commit for the coccinelle rule change, and wanted to find some > logical cut-off between the two? I hope "show_tree()" and "the show_tree_format()" to share this structure, so I made this a pre-prepared and non-functional commit. After that, in the 9/9, the structure can be used directly and focus on the functionality changes. If we merge this commit with 9/9, 9/9 will contain a part of the changes that let "show_tree()" use the new structure, which has nothing to do with "show_tree_format()" actually, because we designed them to go through different execution logic. So, personally, I prefer not to mix them together. So, the commit of "show_tree_data()" originally was not for "coccinelle". The only thing that is certain is that coccinelle also should go before 9/9 I think. With regard to 8/9 and 7/9, I think the current order is OK because they're not related. > > For both this & 9/9 this seems to mostly/substantially be code I wrote > and submitted as part of > https://lore.kernel.org/git/RFC-patch-6.7-eac299f06ff-20211217T131635Z-avarab@gmail.com; > > The convention we use in such cases is to retain the "Author" header and > just add your own Signed-off-by to patches you're modifying/splitting > up. Oops. Sorry for that, I misunderstood it before and I'll be fixed in the next path. Thanks.
diff --git a/builtin/ls-tree.c b/builtin/ls-tree.c index e1a2f8225b..56cc166adb 100644 --- a/builtin/ls-tree.c +++ b/builtin/ls-tree.c @@ -35,6 +35,14 @@ static unsigned int shown_fields; #define FIELD_DEFAULT 29 /* 11101 size is not shown to output by default */ #define FIELD_LONG_DEFAULT (FIELD_DEFAULT | FIELD_SIZE) +struct show_tree_data { + unsigned mode; + enum object_type type; + const struct object_id *oid; + const char *pathname; + struct strbuf *base; +}; + static const char * const ls_tree_usage[] = { N_("git ls-tree [<options>] <tree-ish> [<path>...]"), NULL @@ -108,17 +116,15 @@ static enum object_type get_type(unsigned int mode) : OBJ_BLOB); } -static int show_default(const struct object_id *oid, enum object_type type, - const char *pathname, unsigned mode, - struct strbuf *base) +static int show_default(struct show_tree_data *data) { - size_t baselen = base->len; + size_t baselen = data->base->len; if (shown_fields & FIELD_SIZE) { char size_text[24]; - if (type == OBJ_BLOB) { + if (data->type == OBJ_BLOB) { unsigned long size; - if (oid_object_info(the_repository, oid, &size) == OBJ_BAD) + if (oid_object_info(the_repository, data->oid, &size) == OBJ_BAD) xsnprintf(size_text, sizeof(size_text), "BAD"); else xsnprintf(size_text, sizeof(size_text), @@ -126,18 +132,18 @@ static int show_default(const struct object_id *oid, enum object_type type, } else { xsnprintf(size_text, sizeof(size_text), "-"); } - printf("%06o %s %s %7s\t", mode, type_name(type), - find_unique_abbrev(oid, abbrev), size_text); + printf("%06o %s %s %7s\t", data->mode, type_name(data->type), + find_unique_abbrev(data->oid, abbrev), size_text); } else { - printf("%06o %s %s\t", mode, type_name(type), - find_unique_abbrev(oid, abbrev)); + printf("%06o %s %s\t", data->mode, type_name(data->type), + find_unique_abbrev(data->oid, abbrev)); } - baselen = base->len; - strbuf_addstr(base, pathname); - write_name_quoted_relative(base->buf, + baselen = data->base->len; + strbuf_addstr(data->base, data->pathname); + write_name_quoted_relative(data->base->buf, chomp_prefix ? ls_tree_prefix : NULL, stdout, line_termination); - strbuf_setlen(base, baselen); + strbuf_setlen(data->base, baselen); return 1; } @@ -148,6 +154,14 @@ static int show_tree(const struct object_id *oid, struct strbuf *base, size_t baselen; enum object_type type = get_type(mode); + struct show_tree_data data = { + .mode = mode, + .type = type, + .oid = oid, + .pathname = pathname, + .base = base, + }; + if (type == OBJ_TREE && show_recursive(base->buf, base->len, pathname)) recurse = READ_TREE_RECURSIVE; if (type == OBJ_TREE && recurse && !(ls_options & LS_SHOW_TREES)) @@ -171,7 +185,7 @@ static int show_tree(const struct object_id *oid, struct strbuf *base, } if (shown_fields >= FIELD_DEFAULT) - show_default(oid, type, pathname, mode, base); + show_default(&data); return recurse; }
"show_tree_data" is a struct that packages the necessary fields for "show_tree()". This commit is a pre-prepared commit for supporting "--format" option and it does not affect any existing functionality. Signed-off-by: Teng Long <dyroneteng@gmail.com> --- builtin/ls-tree.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)