From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E449A20179 for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:02:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932067AbcFTHCN (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2016 03:02:13 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:52839 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752598AbcFTHCI (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2016 03:02:08 -0400 Received: from virtualbox ([37.24.143.194]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MNHqL-1bLCs82hdB-006yOa; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 09:01:33 +0200 Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 09:01:30 +0200 (CEST) From: Johannes Schindelin X-X-Sender: virtualbox@virtualbox To: Jeff King cc: Johannes Sixt , "brian m. carlson" , git@vger.kernel.org, Elijah Newren , Junio C Hamano , Stefan Beller Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] object_id part 4 In-Reply-To: <20160619092448.GA12221@sigill.intra.peff.net> Message-ID: References: <20160618221407.1046188-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> <57665CC6.6070208@kdbg.org> <20160619092448.GA12221@sigill.intra.peff.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:cTNK7g/Ayc1dstlCcYXrOrOhwwBUhEGPAJhMC+wSLwztlheneY5 Y4YlODBDIWQ1QqjMrttt79Rwl0VphlvX9gkmPMI1/8DsDBprY7X7RR7jnWovJztM4HQbB1g VgPcb5tnfviV9LfutCoLauJCWYbh46QTf/BBWsi8g52nTXruqsO8KDNuWAPMdDkbC7Qb58G IYAo6i+HH7OkOJNLkO8Vw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:oCveWIswJLY=:q8xOpghVyNqZilSn1Xoerp DziJ7OZo5xubN1LY45gWic7cwmj0NyLRxHV58KHSzuruyjdEJ/IlY+HM6RUntcQYzO/zKaUeQ 4zH4ci6mpdc5jUcGbGHgnoL/mYySpXF5E9XE8/fk0TXVxix4TOrmiFo6Mws9kPoUjUb1jF2+k 4dn5Owkjb7dywZ7vbMnApmlqyd0i3/Dl4Vnxa+vxx7/By83JWyYZFZ4FQ0saSS6/fgrGLxEsN j4pcNEHM9qMJvs2HKfdF1wLWB5YkWpgJFEN8SlLNdEI3rof7cI//x6+gVvqfy+lm/61RXz8Zt vIyimuVdMraB8W3DLwXk4Y3RyAk5IzgjyRlI+mbwWkjWexuFw4519FYT8W7XRLYbkzFyLjtDH z9tDV56aJgKu0E1Jc6z9ZzeizTprQ2dDwKCT4VUkVncjtpDPqHt01gtghMsATDrFffYm4NDm4 l7ZC5uko8Mgv1zVe4zevMkX3Rz8Z4Q7NYLX+3EPafaV4O8gkBL5aGN8geuKT/aiVmbFYxOg76 dLyJVGD0bDBlOs3FYzQZWdgos21KlJ9QfyiK9VerXWXtH34L3jPtw19J06t0i2TSwb2S4sD5R KOCm5/8ohdyWQNWICTJ7IjqEOa/Xe/B35u/mqlNvcvOhtZ6IxHzaoGjOWLsbEakY3Bi2J1ieE R4rHrfwitEa8JKpX/ko92aeFvuBPtApbhKlqjG4u9kGetid6mxBx7MOcG2p/qfHTsP32BlE4k HuID/chteCyCZls+cZeifPr+oPi+3K2KxBbimYAVgfd/XYCa+T+z48Fdp4pFBNN2B+I6/fXr/ 9D6wOeV Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi Peff, On Sun, 19 Jun 2016, Jeff King wrote: > I think traditionally we've avoided struct assignment because some > ancient compilers didn't do it. But it's in C89, and I suspect it's > crept into the code base anyway over the years without anyone > complaining. I fear that's my fault, at least partially, seeing as merge-recursive.c even *returns* structs (see 6d297f81; I plan to fix that as part of the cleaned-up am-3-merge-recursive-direct patch series). Sorry, Dscho