On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Laszlo Papp <djszapi@archlinux.us> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Xavier <shiningxc@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 9:49 PM, Laszlo Papp <djszapi@archlinux.us> wrote:
Pacman's long option parsing used hardcoded numbers to identify them. This is not good practice, so replace them with enumeration constants.
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Papp <djszapi@archlinux.us> ---
I can't apply this (or your other patches), the lines are wrapped in the patch. Please use git-send-email or some other method that doesn't wrap the lines. Other than that, this patch looks good.
For the general audience, is there any reason not just to make these OP_* constants? PM_LONG_OP_ seems a bit excessive for something that isn't in the API or anything.
OP_* sounds good to me.
If you see into the ./src/pacman/conf.h file, you will see the existing operations enumeration start with PM_OP_*. What could I take in this case, is PM_OP_* and that enumeration okay to extend ?
Those opts have a bit of a different meaning, so I don't think that is a wise idea. I'd just make it it's own enum. I'm much more worried about getting the patch in an appliable format than anything else; sorry I got cut off by my wonderful internet connection on IR earlier. Your patch definitely seems to have had newlines in it. I believe you claimed you used git send-email; that does not appear to be the case or these two email headers would be a dead giveaway (and they were not in your patch, this is from a patch Allan sent): Message-Id: <1255262385-18125-1-git-send-email-allan@archlinux.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.6.4.4 -Dan