Re: [PATCH 16/20] revision: trivial style fixes
- From
Stefan Beller <stefanbeller@googlemail.com>
- Date
- Oct 12, 2013, 09:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <52591180.3010103@googlemail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <1381561636-20717-10-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
On 10/12/2013 09:07 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
Show 64 quoted lines
> Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
> ---
> revision.c | 14 ++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
> index 0173e01..4049867 100644
> --- a/revision.c
> +++ b/revision.c
> @@ -1503,7 +1503,7 @@ struct cmdline_pathspec {
> static void append_prune_data(struct cmdline_pathspec *prune, const char **av)
> {
> while (*av) {
> - ALLOC_GROW(prune->path, prune->nr+1, prune->alloc);
> + ALLOC_GROW(prune->path, prune->nr + 1, prune->alloc);
> prune->path[prune->nr++] = *(av++);
> }
> }
> @@ -1515,7 +1515,7 @@ static void read_pathspec_from_stdin(struct rev_info *revs, struct strbuf *sb,
> int len = sb->len;
> if (len && sb->buf[len - 1] == '\n')
> sb->buf[--len] = '\0';
> - ALLOC_GROW(prune->path, prune->nr+1, prune->alloc);
> + ALLOC_GROW(prune->path, prune->nr + 1, prune->alloc);
> prune->path[prune->nr++] = xstrdup(sb->buf);
> }
> }
> @@ -2118,7 +2118,7 @@ int setup_revisions(int argc, const char **argv, struct rev_info *revs, struct s
> * call init_pathspec() to set revs->prune_data here.
> * }
> */
> - ALLOC_GROW(prune_data.path, prune_data.nr+1, prune_data.alloc);
> + ALLOC_GROW(prune_data.path, prune_data.nr + 1, prune_data.alloc);
> prune_data.path[prune_data.nr++] = NULL;
> parse_pathspec(&revs->prune_data, 0, 0,
> revs->prefix, prune_data.path);
> @@ -2971,7 +2971,7 @@ static struct commit *get_revision_internal(struct rev_info *revs)
> if (revs->max_count) {
> c = get_revision_1(revs);
> if (c) {
> - while (0 < revs->skip_count) {
> + while (revs->skip_count > 0) {
> revs->skip_count--;
> c = get_revision_1(revs);
> if (!c)
> @@ -2986,9 +2986,8 @@ static struct commit *get_revision_internal(struct rev_info *revs)
> if (c)
> c->object.flags |= SHOWN;
>
> - if (!revs->boundary) {
> + if (!revs->boundary)
> return c;
> - }
>
> if (!c) {
> /*
> @@ -3034,9 +3033,8 @@ struct commit *get_revision(struct rev_info *revs)
>
> if (revs->reverse) {
> reversed = NULL;
> - while ((c = get_revision_internal(revs))) {
> + while ((c = get_revision_internal(revs)))
> commit_list_insert(c, &reversed);
> - }While talking about trivia, what is the projects stance on such constructs here? while (foo) bar(); foobar();
I've seen an empty line between the bar(); and the foobar(); often, which suits readability. What's the stance on such an empty line here?
> revs->commits = reversed; > revs->reverse = 0; > revs->reverse_output_stage = 1; >
Thanks, Stefan