From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] prepare_packed_git(): find more garbage Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 18:25:35 -0500 Message-ID: <20151215232534.GA30998@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1448518529-2659-1-git-send-email-dougk.ff7@gmail.com> <20151215230957.GA30353@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, sbeller@google.com, gitster@pobox.com To: Doug Kelly X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Dec 16 00:25:44 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 1a8yyU-0005cT-4v for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 00:25:42 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933744AbbLOXZi (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2015 18:25:38 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:42669 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932286AbbLOXZh (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2015 18:25:37 -0500 Received: (qmail 19422 invoked by uid 102); 15 Dec 2015 23:25:37 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 17:25:37 -0600 Received: (qmail 21256 invoked by uid 107); 15 Dec 2015 23:25:44 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 18:25:44 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 15 Dec 2015 18:25:35 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151215230957.GA30353@sigill.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 06:09:57PM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > > @@ -1225,6 +1225,15 @@ static void report_helper(const struct string_list *list, > [...] > If I understand this function correctly, we're just trying to > get rid of "boring" cases that do not need to be reported. BTW, I wondered if this should perhaps just be calling bits_to_msg() and seeing if it returns NULL. It seems like the logic for which cases are "interesting" ends up duplicated. But maybe I am missing something. -Peff