Re: [PATCH] general style: replaces memcmp() with proper starts_with()
- From
Quint Guvernator <quintus.public@gmail.com>
- Date
- Mar 14, 2014, 14:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CALs4jVHcPFjf-12mXvvSxctNJZgLD=P3=57u6_FYePDOB7txQQ@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20140314045758.GA32748@sigill.intra.peff.net>
2014-03-14 0:57 GMT-04:00 Jeff King <peff@peff.net>:
> This discussion ended up encompassing a lot of other related cleanups. I > hope we didn't scare you away. :)
I don't think you could; this community is much more accepting than other software communities around the web. The fact that I received constructive feedback rather than a lecture when formatting issues slipped my mind (i.e. forgetting [PATCH v2]) is reason enough to stick around!
Show 6 quoted lines
> My understanding is that you were approaching this as a micro-project > for GSoC. I'd love it if you want to pick up and run with some of the > ideas discussed here. But as far as a microproject goes, I think it > would make sense to identify one or two no-brainer improvement spots by > hand, and submit a patch with just those (and I think Junio gave some > good guidelines in his reply).
I agree with trying to push a few uncontroversial changes through. I'd love to take a deeper look at these helper functions and related cleanups…perhaps it would be worth it to identify a few key areas to work on in addition to a main GSoC project? In fact, the project I'm looking to take on (rebase --interactive) also involves code cleanup and might not take all summer, so I could see how those could work well together in a proposal.
I'll be re-reading this thread and working on this patch over the weekend to try to identify the more straightforward hunks I could submit in a patch.
Thanks Peff and everyone else for your help. Quint