Re: [PATCH 5/7] grep.c: mark private file-scope symbols as static

From: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sep 20, 2012, 20:43 UTC
Message-ID: <505B7FE4.1050706@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <7vfw6dg2q6.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> writes:
> 
>> Heh, so I obviously didn't see this before sending the patch yesterday! :-D
>>
>> Yes, this solves the problem addressed by yesterday's patch, so please
>> ignore that. However, this tickles sparse to complain as well ... ;-)
>>
>> New patch on it's way.
> 
> Are you sure the patch you are responding to really "tickles
> sparse"?

Yes.

> You have another grep.c patch timestamped two minutes after the
> message I am responding to, and as far as I can see, it is a subset
> of the patch you are responding to with the message I am responding
> to.

Hmm, that sentence has too many twists for me! :-D

Let me see if I can clear up the misunderstanding:

    - the "patch from yesterday" (18-09-2021) fixed a complaint from
      sparse regarding symbol 'dump_grep_expression'. This was before
      I had seen this patch email, or the resulting commit 07a7d656.
      Since my "patch from yesterday" is a strict subset of your patch,
      then your patch also fixes the complaint from sparse regarding
      the 'dump_grep_expression' symbol.

    - this patch (commit 07a7d656) causes sparse to complain about the
      symbols 'grep_source_load' and 'grep_source_is_binary'. The new
      patch from me ("timestamped two minutes after ...") also titled
      "grep.c: Fix some sparse warnings" on 19-09-2012 at 7:04 PM, is
      *not* a subset of commit 07a7d656. This patch addresses the new
      sparse warnings regarding 'grep_source_load' and
      'grep_source_is_binary'.

Hopefully that addresses the confusion! ;-)

HTH

ATB, Ramsay Jones