From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Cc: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>,
"brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>,
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] object_id part 4
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 06:05:23 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160620100522.GB14058@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1606200853580.22630@virtualbox>
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 09:01:30AM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Jun 2016, Jeff King wrote:
>
> > I think traditionally we've avoided struct assignment because some
> > ancient compilers didn't do it. But it's in C89, and I suspect it's
> > crept into the code base anyway over the years without anyone
> > complaining.
>
> I fear that's my fault, at least partially, seeing as merge-recursive.c
> even *returns* structs (see 6d297f81; I plan to fix that as part of the
> cleaned-up am-3-merge-recursive-direct patch series).
Heh, that commit is quite old. If nobody has complained about it, then I
think there is nothing to be sorry about. If struct assignment (and
returns) work everywhere, and they make the code easier to read, we
should be using them.
I am on the fence regarding oidcpy/oidclr. I agree they _could_ be
struct assignments, but it is also convenient to have concept wrapped up
in a function, in case we ever want to do anything more complicated.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-20 10:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-18 22:13 [PATCH v2 0/8] object_id part 4 brian m. carlson
2016-06-18 22:14 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] Add basic Coccinelle transforms brian m. carlson
2016-06-18 22:14 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] Apply object_id Coccinelle transformations brian m. carlson
2016-06-21 21:36 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-06-18 22:14 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] Convert struct diff_filespec to struct object_id brian m. carlson
2016-06-21 22:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-06-24 15:27 ` brian m. carlson
2016-06-18 22:14 ` [PATCH v2 4/8] Rename struct diff_filespec's sha1_valid member brian m. carlson
2016-06-18 22:14 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] merge-recursive: convert struct stage_data to use object_id brian m. carlson
2016-06-18 22:14 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] merge-recursive: convert struct merge_file_info to object_id brian m. carlson
2016-06-18 22:14 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] merge-recursive: convert leaf functions to use struct object_id brian m. carlson
2016-06-18 22:14 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] merge-recursive: convert merge_recursive_generic to object_id brian m. carlson
2016-06-19 8:50 ` [PATCH v2 0/8] object_id part 4 Johannes Sixt
2016-06-19 9:24 ` Jeff King
2016-06-19 17:25 ` brian m. carlson
2016-06-20 7:01 ` Johannes Schindelin
2016-06-20 10:05 ` Jeff King [this message]
2016-06-20 15:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-06-21 21:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-06-22 18:44 ` brian m. carlson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160620100522.GB14058@sigill.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=j6t@kdbg.org \
--cc=newren@gmail.com \
--cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
--cc=sbeller@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).