From: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:38:00 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/33] peel_ref(): fix return value for non-peelable, not-current reference
Message-ID: <516D1BF8.9030009@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <7va9ozwv70.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On 04/15/2013 07:38 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> 
>> The old version was inconsistent: when a reference was
>> REF_KNOWS_PEELED but with a null peeled value, it returned non-zero
>> for the current reference but zero for other references.  Change the
>> behavior for non-current references to match that of current_ref,
>> which is what callers expect.  Document the behavior.
>>
>> Current callers did not trigger the previously-buggy behavior.
> 
> Is that because we were lucky by codeflow, or is it just that we
> didn't have a testcase to trigger the behaviour?

Existing callers only called peel_ref() from within a for_each_ref-style
iteration and only for the current ref.  Therefore the buggy code path
was impossible to reach.

I will note that in the commit message.

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@alum.mit.edu
http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/