Re: [PATCH] Use correct U*MAX.

PB> Care to elaborate? It doesn't make sense to me to use any U*MAX stuff PB> there whatsoever. (And how do you define the "correct" U*MAX anyway?)

It just feels wrong to spell a parameter to the function locate_size_cache() "-1" when I know the argument it expects is of type unsigned long. And correct U*MAX for that case is obviously ULONG_MAX, _assuming_ that you agree to the function's (unwritten) calling convention of "passing the largest possible value to me means 'do not create', not 'you are telling me that sha1 is such a large file'".

If you feel strongly about that calling convention, you could rewrite it to take the third argument "int do_not_create" and pass that information separately, which is conceptually cleaner. I just did not think that was worth it for such an internal helper when I wrote it.