Matthieu Moy <matthieu....@grenoble-inp.fr> writes:
>>> + if (user_config && access(user_config, R_OK) &&
>>> + xdg_config && !access(xdg_config, R_OK))
>>> given_config_file = xdg_config;
>>
>> Shouldn't we be using xdg_config, if user_config is NULL and
>> xdg_config is defined and accessible?
>
> I don't think so. If user_config is NULL, it means something went wrong,
> because $HOME is unset. In this case, I'd rather die than using some
> other configuration file silently (which would be possible if
> $XDG_CONFIG_HOME is set), and this is what the code does:
>
> if (user_config && access(user_config, R_OK) &&
> xdg_config && !access(xdg_config, R_OK))
> given_config_file = xdg_config;
> else if (user_config)
> given_config_file = user_config;
> else
> die("$HOME not set");
>
> Perhaps it could actually be made even clearer with
>
> if (!user_config)
> die("$HOME not set");
> else if (access(user_config, R_OK) &&
> xdg_config && !access(xdg_config, R_OK))
> given_config_file = xdg_config;
> else
> given_config_file = user_config;
At least the code needs to break lines at different point and a comment.
if (user_config &&
access(user_config, R_OK) &&
(xdg_config && !access(xdg_config, R_OK)))
/*
* Even if we have usable XDG stuff, we want to
* error out on missing HOME!!!
*/
use xdg config;
else if (user_config)
use user config;
else
unusable situation;
But is it really true that we want to error out on missing HOME if
we have usable XDG stuff?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
