From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkout-index.c: Unconditionally free memory Date: Sat, 2 May 2015 22:30:24 -0400 Message-ID: <20150503023024.GA4269@peff.net> References: <1430508507-14016-1-git-send-email-sbeller@google.com> <1430519737-6224-1-git-send-email-sbeller@google.com> <20150501224334.GB1179@peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Stefan Beller , git@vger.kernel.org, sunshine@sunshineco.com To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun May 03 04:30:34 2015 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 1Yojfs-00023E-My for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 03 May 2015 04:30:33 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751612AbbECCa3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 May 2015 22:30:29 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:53425 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750955AbbECCa2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 May 2015 22:30:28 -0400 Received: (qmail 4428 invoked by uid 102); 3 May 2015 02:30:27 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Sat, 02 May 2015 21:30:27 -0500 Received: (qmail 10489 invoked by uid 107); 3 May 2015 02:30:58 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Sat, 02 May 2015 22:30:58 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 02 May 2015 22:30:24 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, May 02, 2015 at 07:15:08PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 03:35:37PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > > > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkout-index.c: Unconditionally free memory > > > > Looks like the patch has expanded beyond checkout-index.c. Maybe: > > > > unconditionally free result of prefix_path > > > > would be more descriptive? I usually like the "area:" prefix, but I > > think here the common thread is not an area, but that they are return > > values from prefix_path. > > Sure, the prefix could even be "prefix_path(): $message", I would > think. I almost suggested that, but it not a change to prefix_path at all, but rather to its callers. That may be getting nit-picky, though. :) -Peff