On Thursday 15 November 2007 21:10, Steffen Prohaska wrote:
quoted text
> On Nov 15, 2007, at 7:31 PM, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> > On Thursday 15 November 2007 07:53, Steffen Prohaska wrote:
> >> Now I'm wondering if we could make path relocation a bit more
> >> explicit.  How about doing something like.
> >>
> >> 	system_wide = relocate_path(ETC_GITCONFIG);
> >>
> >> and relocate_path(const char *) would expand a format
> >> string in path.  At this point I see only a single %s
> >> that would be expanded with the install prefix.  If
> >> ETC_GITCONFIG is "%s/etc/gitconfig" relocate path will return
> >> "C:/msysgit/bin/etc/gitconfig" for my above example.  It is
> >> basically a printf with the install prefix path.
> >
> > I don't see the problem that you are trying to solve.
>
> Path relocation would be more explicit:
> 1) Paths that need to be relocated are filtered through
>     relocate_path().  That's easy to understand.
> 2) All the code prefixing the path is in relocate_path().
>     This avoids code duplication.
> 3) Path that should be relocated contain "%s" in the Makefile.
>     This indicates that some string expansion may take place.
>
> (1) and (2) would be useful even if you do not agree with (3).
> The code in PATCH 9/11 and PATCH 11/11 looks very similar.
> If the prefixing code went into a separate function, we'd
> have less code.  Also, relocate_path() could be useful at
> other places.  For example, I'd use it to locate the HTML
> documentation relative to the installation directory.

How is %s/foo different from ../foo? There are only 2 paths that need to be 
relocatable. Your proposal is over-engineering, IMHO.

-- Hannes
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html