From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Rast Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] Refactor pretty_print_commit arguments into a struct Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:51:16 +0200 Message-ID: <200910182051.20461.trast@student.ethz.ch> References: <9d3d0f0a6126afc86689138adf58ac7a12c43858.1255701207.git.trast@student.ethz.ch> <7vljja7xy8.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jeff King , Jef Driesen , Nanako Shiraishi , To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Oct 18 20:52:09 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MzarO-0006TY-LU for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:52:06 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755154AbZJRSvz (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:51:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755149AbZJRSvz (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:51:55 -0400 Received: from gwse.ethz.ch ([129.132.178.238]:59436 "EHLO gwse.ethz.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755152AbZJRSvy (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:51:54 -0400 Received: from CAS02.d.ethz.ch (129.132.178.236) by gws01.d.ethz.ch (129.132.178.238) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:51:57 +0200 Received: from thomas.localnet (129.132.208.147) by mail.ethz.ch (129.132.178.227) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:51:56 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.27.29-0.1-default; KDE/4.3.1; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <7vljja7xy8.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > The existing calls to format_commit_message() often take DATE_NORMAL to > its "enum date_mode dmode" argument, and you replaced it with a pointer to > a struct. DATE_NORMAL happens to be "0" and the compiler does not catch > calls you forgot to convert in this patch. Hmph, that's embarrassing. Apparently I was way too focused on pretty_print_commit... I can devise a test that would have detected this. Should I include it in the reroll, or is that something we do not guard against? -- Thomas Rast trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch