[Toybox] Pending fiddliness
Rob Landley
rob at landley.net
Wed Jun 19 17:51:15 PDT 2013
I've been holding off on "mv" forever, even though it's a commonly used
command that I've got the infrastructure for (it's a simpler version of
cp), because I haven't figured out how to get the code sharing quite
right yet.
I want to share infrastructure between "mv" an option of "cp". The
main() function is mostly the same, for example. And if mv is used
across partitions, it falls back to a combination of cp and rm.
I could move cp code out into lib/ but that gets built for every
command, and makes reading the logic of "cp" itself more convoluted. If
only two commands are sharing it, having the logic way out of line is
not ideal. The other way of doing this is to add an OLDTOY() macro to
cp.c adding mv as an alias with different behavior. The problem here is
option flags.
The option flag infrastructure defines FLAGS_X for the current command.
That's the main reason #define FOR_mv is needed up at the top, I could
never work out how to autoselect that from __FILE__ or similar.
(There's no strcmp in #if tests.)
So commands that share a .c file can't have their own FLAG_ macros. I
could do the flag math by hand (the flags run right to left to make
that easier, the same order as the binary bits when written out, abcd
a=8 b=4 c=2 d=1), but I've removed the need for that from the rest of
the code and doing it here seems ugly. (And brittle if I change the
flags and have to redo them by hand...)
Maybe I'll do them by hand for right now and try to come up with a
cleaner way later...
Or I could be _really_ subtle and only use a subset of the flags that
mv alreay does (POSIX only specifies -f and -i, the rest are optional),
and keep them in the same order so the FLAG macros work out right. But
I _really_ shouldn't name the variable that indicates we were called as
move instead of cp TT.fezzig.
http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20100609
(Hy iz not done mit tryink de sottle!)
Rob
More information about the Toybox
mailing list