Re: [RFC Outreachy] Leftoverbits, which involve replacing atoi with strtol or strtol_i or equivalent.

[Usman Akinyemi <usmanakinyemi202@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:49 AM Usman Akinyemi
<usmanakinyemi202@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 12:42 AM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 03:46:05AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 3:56 PM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Usman,
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 11:21:13AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > I was looking at some #leftoverbits which I can work on and I came
> > > > > across this conversation.
> > > > > https://public-inbox.org/git/CAC4O8c-nuOTS=a0sVp1603KaM2bZjs+yNZzdAaa5CGTNGFE7hQ@mail.gmail.com/
> > > > >
> > > > > I followed the conversation and came accross
> > > > > three instances where I think atoi can be
> > > > > converted to strtol or strtol_i or parse_timestamp().
> > > > > These are the three files which I think the atoi can be
> > > > > replaced with.
> > > >
> > > > This seems like a good #leftoverbits to use as an Outreachy
> > > > contribution. From a brief skim, it looks like this is going in the
> > > > right direction.
> > > >
> > > > But to get help from the rest of the list, please submit this change as
> > > > a patch or patch series, following the instructions in:
> > > >
> > > >   - Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt, and
> > > >   - Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> > > >
> > > Thanks Taylor, I already went through these as I already sent my first
> > > patch before.  Also, I already sent a patch as you suggested. Thank
> > > you very much.
> > > Usman Akinyemi.
> >
> > I must be missing something... I don't see any patches from you that
> > touch e.g., merge-ll.c, which is the first file you mention in this
> > thread.
> >
> > Try searching the list archive for:
> >
> >   f:'Usman Akinyemi' dfn:merge-ll.c
> >
> > Is this different from the other patches you have sent to the list? My
> > apologies if I am missing something here.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Taylor
> Hi, Taylor
>
> Thanks for the reply. There is a little confusion going on.
>
> This is what happened. I had two patches which are entirely different
> from this leftoverbit. Both has been reviewed by other maintainer and
> integrated into seen by Junio through
> https://github.com/git/git/commit/4dae47e02757333b7d6a6508e36ccb5463b6ad92
>  and https://github.com/git/git/commit/dfdc6a71e76c7a1dab22fc9d9e437c858cfea6dc.
> I submitted this leftoverbit patch but I made the mistake of basing it
> on top of the previous branch which I use for the two above commits.
> This is the commit which has the leftoverbit and the previous two
> commits which have already been integrated into seen.
> https://public-inbox.org/git/pull.1810.git.git.1728774574.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/T/#t
> That is the reason why you saw it again. Also, I noticed you also
> integrated the two patches again into seen and gave some comments. I
> think that might not be needed again. Thank you.
I meant for those particular two patches, since it is integrated into
seen already,
I can probably wait for it to be merged then work on the review which
you gave or what do you think should be done ?
Thank you.