Re: What's cooking in git.git (Nov 2013, #05; Thu, 21)

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Nov 22, 2013, 17:26 UTC
Message-ID: <20131122172626.GA4881@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <87d2lsjs4q.fsf@linux-k42r.v.cablecom.net>

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 05:52:37PM +0100, Thomas Rast wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> > Looks like you picked up my latest re-roll with Ramsay's fix on top.
> > There wasn't a lot of review on this past round (I'm not surprised; it's
> > a dauntingly large chunk to review).  I outlined a few possible open
> > issues in the cover letter, but I'd be happy to build those on top,
> > which I think will make review of them a lot easier.
> >
> > Do we want to try this in 'next' post-1.8.5, or should I try to prod an
> > area expert like Shawn into doing another round of review?
> 
> Hmm, maybe I missed something, but AFAICS you (or Vicent) never acted on
> or responded to my June reviews in this thread:
> 
>   http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/228918
> 
> and again mentioned here, though I didn't point out all of them:
> 
>   http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/236587/focus=236740

Sorry, I didn't respond directly to the email. Vicent did a pass for style and documentation shortly after the initial series, and then I did another pass in the most recent re-roll, adding a C fallback for the gcc builtin. I thought that covered it, but:

> Granted, the way I verified this was checking whether you renamed
> rlw_xor_run_bit() to something more fitting, so perhaps you just forgot
> that one thing but did all the rest.

I didn't touch that. Vicent, did you have a comment on the name (it really does look like it is a negation, and the only caller is ewah_not).

-Peff