Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] cli: refactor insert

diff --git a/43/275088d224f826747f7e236bcc0518cc155a53 b/43/275088d224f826747f7e236bcc0518cc155a53
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..d2da0c1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/43/275088d224f826747f7e236bcc0518cc155a53
@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+Return-Path: <david@tethera.net>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1F0F431FB6\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat,  5 Jul 2014 06:19:57 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: 0\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none]\r
+       autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id pYTWlS60RAPq for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Sat,  5 Jul 2014 06:19:53 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from mx.xen14.node3324.gplhost.com (gitolite.debian.net\r
+       [87.98.215.224]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCC20431FAF\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat,  5 Jul 2014 06:19:52 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from remotemail by mx.xen14.node3324.gplhost.com with local (Exim\r
+       4.72) (envelope-from <david@tethera.net>)\r
+       id 1X3PrE-0005vm-TV; Sat, 05 Jul 2014 13:18:24 +0000\r
+Received: (nullmailer pid 25817 invoked by uid 1000); Sat, 05 Jul 2014\r
+       13:18:05 -0000\r
+From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>\r
+To: Peter Wang <novalazy@gmail.com>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] cli: refactor insert\r
+In-Reply-To: <1397653165-15620-7-git-send-email-novalazy@gmail.com>\r
+References: <1397653165-15620-1-git-send-email-novalazy@gmail.com>\r
+       <1397653165-15620-7-git-send-email-novalazy@gmail.com>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.1+22~gbf82697 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1\r
+       (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2014 10:18:05 -0300\r
+Message-ID: <87simgq702.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2014 13:19:57 -0000\r
+\r
+Peter Wang <novalazy@gmail.com> writes:\r
+\r
+> -    cleanup_path = tmppath;\r
+> -\r
+> -    if (! copy_stdin (fdin, fdout))\r
+> -    goto FAIL;\r
+> +    if (! copy_stdin (fdin, fdout)) {\r
+> +    close (fdout);\r
+> +    unlink (tmppath);\r
+> +    return FALSE;\r
+> +    }\r
+\r
+I'm not completely convinced by replacement of the "goto FAIL" with the\r
+multiple returns.  I'd lean to towards being consistent with the notmuch\r
+codebase unless the FAIL block is really horrendous\r
+\r
+Is there a good reason to use TRUE and FALSE for return values rather\r
+than EXIT_SUCCESS and EXIT_FAILURE? It seems like the latter would be\r
+overall slightly simpler in notmuch_insert_command.\r
+\r
+d\r