From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] move setting of object->type to alloc_* functions Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 14:05:39 -0400 Message-ID: <20140712180539.GA13806@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20140711084141.GA5521@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20140711084611.GB5625@sigill.intra.peff.net> <53C149B6.7010705@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , GIT Mailing-list To: Ramsay Jones X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Jul 12 20:05:47 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1X61g9-0005lL-O6 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 20:05:46 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752472AbaGLSFm (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Jul 2014 14:05:42 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:60882 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751452AbaGLSFl (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Jul 2014 14:05:41 -0400 Received: (qmail 27598 invoked by uid 102); 12 Jul 2014 18:05:41 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 13:05:41 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 12 Jul 2014 14:05:39 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53C149B6.7010705@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 03:44:06PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote: > > - return alloc_node(&name##_state, sizeof(type)); \ > > + return alloc_node(&name##_state, flag, sizeof(type)); \ > > } > > I don't particularly like 'flag' here. (not a massive dislike, mind you:) > > Perhaps: flag->object_type, type->node_type? > Or, if that's too verbose, maybe just: flag->type, type->node? Me either, but as you noticed, type was taken. Your suggestions seem fine. We could also just do away with the macro as discussed earlier (we already do in the commit_node case, anyway...). -Peff