[pacman-dev] PATCH 8/8] Replace hardcoded option numbers with enumeration

[Dan McGee]

On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Laszlo Papp <djszapi at archlinux.us> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Xavier <shiningxc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 9:49 PM, Laszlo Papp <djszapi at 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 at 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 at archlinux.org>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.6.4.4

-Dan