From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Fix some "variable might be used uninitialized" warnings Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:59:53 -0700 Message-ID: <7vty7gieiu.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <4E6D0E74.1020801@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> <7vpqj6olfa.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <4E6FDBA4.6050505@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> <4E90751C.4030409@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: GIT Mailing-list To: Ramsay Jones X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 11 02:00:05 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RDPlK-0004mY-1z for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:00:02 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752564Ab1JJX75 (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2011 19:59:57 -0400 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:59173 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751061Ab1JJX74 (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2011 19:59:56 -0400 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 012BB55C8; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 19:59:56 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=sasl; bh=/uFyt+HkDxw67SBM+r8O/6ro2PU=; b=t2nnSkfVOFe33bDVv9lK qlxmfIH+nGe+CKPP4KK6d48w9yiaVbwsqV8VLnD2vDZCoL7xi9lTMf8E2hbXVHae 84iiqyDmVJ0Kf0BX29HKWSspmhu2songssh1t6KW4Db1SvNs930pKxrxgmPmLMT4 iPuf1aaxuH/x7RxKOOnexF8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=pgEMcb30jubDsP+r6Ti9IqB5yuHZhYI0frm2egHayPP6hq DGUwCCo7nUDYAHBx8V4QRhpU4AQFn/bU3I/51P7AtkcFb3mWeHpRV9c11NGTQPtB ptkhtowrF9lh+XhDnZ39lRmvz61rRB5i2CsfCCTWY6CeNhqWVl8DoGIgnZ93k= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECF8155C7; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 19:59:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5782A55C6; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 19:59:55 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F39C18A4-F39B-11E0-B2EF-9DB42E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Ramsay Jones writes: >> [I don't think traverse_trees() would ever be called with n == 0 anyway; the call >> site in builtin/merge-tree.c is called with the constant 3, and the call-chains(s) >> which start from unpack_trees() are protected by "if (len)", where 'len' is unsigned.] > > When patches don't even make it to pu I just assume you hate them so much that > there is not much chance of them being applied and simply forget about them. > In this case, since compiler warnings are a bugbear of mine, I'm hoping that > you just forgot about this one ... :-D [if not, sorry for the noise]. Thanks for a reminder. The reason a patch may not hit 'pu', unless I or other people whose judgement I trust explicity say "the approach taken by the patch is utterly wrong" is either because (1) the discussion for or against the topic is still going strong and there is little chance of it getting forgotten by everybody, (2) I do not see much discussion for or against the topic, and I am indifferent, or (3) the patch was just lost in the noise. So a good default strategy for a series that do not hit 'pu' is to re-post. Such a perseverance was what took format-patch to hit Linus's tree in June-July 2005 timeframe---we wouldn't have the command today, had I given up back then ;-).