Re: [PATCH] shortlog: take the first populated line of the description

[Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>]

On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 03:48:00PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/builtin-shortlog.c b/builtin-shortlog.c
> > index af31aba..b22b0ed 100644
> > --- a/builtin-shortlog.c
> > +++ b/builtin-shortlog.c
> > @@ -70,11 +70,12 @@ static void insert_one_record(struct shortlog *log,
> >  	else
> >  		free(buffer);
> >  
> > +	/* Skip any leading whitespace, including any blank lines. */
> > +	while (*oneline && isspace(*oneline))
> > +		oneline++;
> >  	eol = strchr(oneline, '\n');
> >  	if (!eol)
> >  		eol = oneline + strlen(oneline);
> > -	while (*oneline && isspace(*oneline) && *oneline != '\n')
> > -		oneline++;
> >  	if (!prefixcmp(oneline, "[PATCH")) {
> >  		char *eob = strchr(oneline, ']');
> >  		if (eob && (!eol || eob < eol))
> 
> Why do you move the code around?  Makes it harder to read your patch.  
> Besides, you now strip empty lines at the beginning of the commit 
> messages, right?  Who produces such a thing?

I've not moved the code as such.  I added a loop to drop the leading
whitespace.  That made the second loop redundant as its job is already
done, so I killed it.

The point of the patch is to strip the empty lines at the start of
the commit.  I am ending up with them in my repo mostly due to
imcompetant users of SVN I suspect.  The main driver is that I have
those and the original non-C version coped and the builtin does not.

Now if people think that its a stupid idea I might suggest it could be
optional?

-apw