From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] builtin-remote: move duplicated cleanup code its own function Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:50:07 -0500 Message-ID: <20090212015007.GA3187@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1234332083-45147-1-git-send-email-jaysoffian@gmail.com> <1234332083-45147-2-git-send-email-jaysoffian@gmail.com> <20090212001836.GB30231@coredump.intra.peff.net> <76718490902111744p27e83238x34cb7004d8e3e48f@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com To: Jay Soffian X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Feb 12 02:51:39 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LXQjq-00087L-S6 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 02:51:39 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756312AbZBLBuM (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:50:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753099AbZBLBuL (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:50:11 -0500 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:34142 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752853AbZBLBuK (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:50:10 -0500 Received: (qmail 4698 invoked by uid 107); 12 Feb 2009 01:50:27 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTPA; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:50:27 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:50:07 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <76718490902111744p27e83238x34cb7004d8e3e48f@mail.gmail.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 08:44:13PM -0500, Jay Soffian wrote: > I spent about 5 minutes which was enough time for me to realize that > the reason the previous author left it as "NEEDSWORK" is because > fixing it is more than 5 minutes of work. This is the remote object -- > maybe you could offer me some clues that allow me to know which of its > fields need to be freed individually: > [...] > I *think* const is a clue that the field need not be freed, because > the pointer is to storage that is on the stack. But I wasn't sure, esp > with the double pointers. And I really wasn't sure about the struct > pointers. OK, I am satisfied that it is not trivial, and doesn't need to be part of this patch series. :) Like I said, I don't actually know this corner of the code very well, but since you hadn't mentioned it in your cover letter, I didn't know if it was "too lazy to do cleanups" or "code is too scary to be cleaned up". -Peff