From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Erik Faye-Lund Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/14] wt-status.c: Initialise variable to suppress msvc warning Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 20:46:02 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4CFA92A2.4030801@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> <20101204205206.GB3170@burratino> <4D011D30.4070405@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> <7vmxoeg3wp.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Reply-To: kusmabite@gmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Ramsay Jones , Jonathan Nieder , Johannes Sixt , Sebastian Schuberth , GIT Mailing-list To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 09 20:46:30 2010 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 1PQmRh-0002n9-GY for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Dec 2010 20:46:29 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754390Ab0LITqY (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2010 14:46:24 -0500 Received: from mail-fx0-f43.google.com ([209.85.161.43]:33978 "EHLO mail-fx0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752936Ab0LITqY (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2010 14:46:24 -0500 Received: by fxm18 with SMTP id 18so2840328fxm.2 for ; Thu, 09 Dec 2010 11:46:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:reply-to :in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc :content-type; bh=A02zivJjtmkK93zHn5k3FVWFXpSDE822MtiNIf4X5oE=; b=B4CQzs0+gXug9M98VnUccPpDAb494Iq0pkRVdRweF4arUa2w/rV86DlDoZEmnbni0+ HhXF8p/c6vY4VW+7/KQ3nZemGMuV2EhNbqueKCNXjw/ca6U47us/q6a8UP2eF8L8Ekyo 7Hb3hKoZEEZRfycaLXIBBlXTjPhk947CbiDuU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; b=URSLqVhnnjbMSNETMXXViUxXjz+jFz0VrXGpXK5B+b2cBd7zYHmU6FDWK2aTLAHgcm YnT+1KLsgTkh49V0ExxMcWF66MH+YIK7AKXIc5IP5Tr4cyJoCFKnO5ivFW2oneUT+iQH J1dHSGqyN9G0t1m0R5EQ3gL8PPg315PZP7fvM= Received: by 10.223.83.11 with SMTP id d11mr10404571fal.37.1291923982529; Thu, 09 Dec 2010 11:46:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.95.202 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Dec 2010 11:46:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7vmxoeg3wp.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 8:08 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ramsay Jones writes: > >> Junio, could you please drop patches 5-14 from the series; the first four patches >> are the important ones and I'd rather they didn't get held up. Thanks! > > Have these four patches been Acked by interested parties? > > I think I saw 1/N and 2/N acked by Erik and 4/N acked by SSchuberth and > J6t, but any words on 3/N? > > Not that I deeply care nor have environment to test changes to [3/N], but > I am wondering if these need conditional definition to futureproof (e.g. > what happens when the header you are using the definition _I64_MIN from, > or some other headers, started defining these constats?). I'm not sure if I follow this entirely. _I64_MIN is defined by limits.h on Windows, and limits.h has a header-guard (or "#pragma once" as Microsoft-code tends to prefer). Oh, right. You mean if someone else starts defining INTMAX_MAX etc? If someone includes an stdint/inttypes-implementation while including git-compat-util.h, we're going to have a boat-load of similar issues anyway. I think guarding them is something that's better left to when we encounter the problem (if ever). All in all, patch 1 though 4 looks good to me. And thanks to Ramsay for cleaning up my mess :)