From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] filter-branch: work correctly with ambiguous refnames Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 18:53:44 -0800 Message-ID: <7v8x337jgn.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1199040667-31850-1-git-send-email-dpotapov@gmail.com> <7v7iiqppkw.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080104155114.GS3373@dpotapov.dyndns.org> <7vr6gxjpyn.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vabnk81aw.fsf_-_@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Dmitry Potapov , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jan 06 03:54:33 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JBLej-0008NK-3o for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 03:54:33 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752209AbYAFCx4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jan 2008 21:53:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752024AbYAFCx4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jan 2008 21:53:56 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:52219 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752015AbYAFCx4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jan 2008 21:53:56 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37EB18CB0; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 21:53:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC14C8CAF; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 21:53:48 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Sun, 6 Jan 2008 01:57:39 +0000 (GMT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin writes: > In any case, from a cursory look I like the 2 patches (except for the > curly brackets around the single-line "else" clause, but I know your > opinion about this, so I will not object). I care more about consistency across codebase than my own preference [*1*]. I just picked the style the kernel folks seem to use (see their Documentation/CodingStyle), only because (1) there seem to be people familiar with it, and (2) I am not particularly interested myself in wasting time arguing over which style is superiour. I just had to pick one and that was the one I happened to have at hand. And obviously I care more about correctness, so I'd appreciate a review with non cursory look if you have time. [Footnote] *1* I favoring shorter code over consistency between when-true and when-false clauses. IOW, I do not like having to have {} around a single statement in else clause when if clause needs {} around it.