Siddharth Kannan <kannan.siddhart...@gmail.com> writes: > This "changing the order" gave me the idea to change the flow. I tried to > implement the above steps without touching the function handle_revision_opt. > By > inserting the handle_revision_arg call just before calling > handle_revision_opt.
Changing the order is changing the order of the function calls, i.e. changing the flow. So at the idea level we are on the same page. I was shooting for not having to duplicate calls to handle_revision_arg(). >> But I think the resulting code flow is much closer to the >> above ideal. > > (about Junio's version of the patch): Yes, I agree with you on this. It's like > the ideal, but the argv has already been populated, so the only remaining step > is "left++". >> >> Such a change to handle_revision_opt() unfortunately affects other >> callers of the function, so it may not be worth it. See the 3-patch series I just sent out. I didn't think it through very carefully (especially the error message the other caller produces), but the whole thing _smells_ correct to me.
