Re: [PATCH v1 4/5] rebase: fill `squash_onto' in get_replay_opts()
- From
- Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
- Date
- Oct 2, 2019, 09:32 UTC
- Message-ID
- <94dbb49e-2c11-ce30-5d50-05be19ebb3bb@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1910021011010.46@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>
Hi Dscho
On 02/10/2019 09:16, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Show 7 quoted lines
> Hi, > > On Fri, 27 Sep 2019, Phillip Wood wrote: > >> Hi Alban >> >> On 25/09/2019 21:13, Alban Gruin wrote:
>>> [...]
Show 16 quoted lines
>>> builtin/rebase.c | 5 +++++
>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/builtin/rebase.c b/builtin/rebase.c
>>> index e8319d5946..2097d41edc 100644
>>> --- a/builtin/rebase.c
>>> +++ b/builtin/rebase.c
>>> @@ -117,6 +117,11 @@ static struct replay_opts get_replay_opts(const struct
>>> rebase_options *opts)
>>> if (opts->strategy_opts)
>>> parse_strategy_opts(&replay, opts->strategy_opts);
>>> + if (opts->squash_onto) {
>
> I guess it does not matter much, but shouldn't this be guarded against
> the case where `replay.squash_onto` was already initialized? Like, `if
> (opts->squash_onto && !replay.have_squash_onto)`?replay is uninitialized as this function takes a `struct rebase_opitons` and returns a new `struct replay_options` based on that.
Best Wishes
Phillip
Show 16 quoted lines
> > Other than that, this patch makes sense to me. > > Ciao, > Dscho > >>> + oidcpy(&replay.squash_onto, opts->squash_onto); >>> + replay.have_squash_onto = 1; >>> + } >>> + >>> return replay; >>> } >>> >>> >> >>