Re: [PATCH 1/3] fetch-pack: move code to report unmatched refs to a function

[Matt McCutchen <matt@mattmccutchen.net>]

On Wed, 2017-02-22 at 09:11 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Matt McCutchen <matt@mattmccutchen.net> writes:
> 
> > We're preparing to reuse this code in transport.c for "git fetch".
> > 
> > While I'm here, internationalize the existing error message.
> > ---
> 
> Sounds good.  Please just say it is OK for me to forge your sign-off
> ;-)

Oops.  Given the other issue below, I'll just regenerate the patch
series.

> > diff --git a/fetch-pack.h b/fetch-pack.h
> > index c912e3d..fd4d80e 100644
> > --- a/fetch-pack.h
> > +++ b/fetch-pack.h
> > @@ -45,4 +45,13 @@ struct ref *fetch_pack(struct fetch_pack_args
> > *args,
> >  		       struct sha1_array *shallow,
> >  		       char **pack_lockfile);
> >  
> > +/*
> > + * Print an appropriate error message for each sought ref that
> > wasn't
> > + * matched.  Return 0 if all sought refs were matched, otherwise
> > 1.
> > + *
> > + * The type of "sought" should be "const struct ref *const *" but
> > for
> > + * http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5055655/double-pointer-const
> > -correctness-warnings-in-c .
> > + */
> 
> This is an unfinished sentence, but I wonder if we even need to have
> it here?  I'd be surprised if this function was unique in the
> codebase that takes an array pointer whose type is looser than
> necessary because of well-known language rules.

You're probably right.  I'm in the habit of documenting things that
were unknown to me, but I'll take your word for what's well-known to
the average git developer.  I'll remove the remark.

Matt