From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D2501F45F for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 21:30:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726824AbfEIVa6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 May 2019 17:30:58 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:53696 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1726219AbfEIVa6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 May 2019 17:30:58 -0400 Received: (qmail 10081 invoked by uid 109); 9 May 2019 21:30:58 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Thu, 09 May 2019 21:30:58 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 6526 invoked by uid 111); 9 May 2019 21:31:35 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) SMTP; Thu, 09 May 2019 17:31:35 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 09 May 2019 17:30:56 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 17:30:56 -0400 From: Jeff King To: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH 08/14] name-rev: drop unused parameters from is_better_name() Message-ID: <20190509213056.GH15837@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20190509212558.GA15438@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190509212558.GA15438@sigill.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org When this function was extracted in 0041bf6544 (name-rev: refactor logic to see if a new candidate is a better name, 2017-03-29), it ended up getting more arguments than it needs. It's possible we may later use these values to evaluate the name, but since it's a static function with a single caller, it will be easy to add them back then. Signed-off-by: Jeff King --- builtin/name-rev.c | 5 +---- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/builtin/name-rev.c b/builtin/name-rev.c index 05ccf53e00..16df43473a 100644 --- a/builtin/name-rev.c +++ b/builtin/name-rev.c @@ -40,9 +40,7 @@ static void set_commit_rev_name(struct commit *commit, struct rev_name *name) } static int is_better_name(struct rev_name *name, - const char *tip_name, timestamp_t taggerdate, - int generation, int distance, int from_tag) { @@ -103,8 +101,7 @@ static void name_rev(struct commit *commit, name = xmalloc(sizeof(rev_name)); set_commit_rev_name(commit, name); goto copy_data; - } else if (is_better_name(name, tip_name, taggerdate, - generation, distance, from_tag)) { + } else if (is_better_name(name, taggerdate, distance, from_tag)) { copy_data: name->tip_name = tip_name; name->taggerdate = taggerdate; -- 2.21.0.1382.g4c6032d436