From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C4CE431FC3 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2013 03:47:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RPQzgARGDlFd for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2013 03:47:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from yantan.tethera.net (yantan.tethera.net [199.188.72.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 095D5431FB6 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2013 03:47:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from remotemail by yantan.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VnoRd-0003P6-8j; Tue, 03 Dec 2013 07:47:13 -0400 Received: (nullmailer pid 7517 invoked by uid 1000); Tue, 03 Dec 2013 11:47:09 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Jani Nikula , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] lib: introduce notmuch_database_new for initializing a database handle In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Notmuch/0.17~rc2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 07:47:09 -0400 Message-ID: <87wqjm2m2q.fsf@zancas.localnet> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 11:47:21 -0000 The first patch looks ok. I like the new API overall. As far as breaking contrib/notmuch-deliver, I'd rather fix notmuch-insert than put effort into notmuch-deliver at this point. I guess it could be a rough transition for people running notmuch-deliver from git. Jani Nikula writes: > +/* > + * XXX: error handling should clean up *all* state created! > + */ is this a warning to future hackers or some current problem? > notmuch_status_t > -notmuch_database_open (const char *path, > - notmuch_database_mode_t mode, > - notmuch_database_t **database) > +notmuch_database_open (notmuch_database_t *notmuch, const char *path, > + notmuch_database_mode_t mode) > > +/* Initialize a new, empty database handle. > + * I wondered about making the new documentation adhere to doxygen? > + if (notmuch_database_open (notmuch, > + notmuch_config_get_database_path (config), > + NOTMUCH_DATABASE_MODE_READ_ONLY)) Would it make any sense to migrate the mode argument to an option setting while we're messing with the API?