From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 23:39:52 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/12] attr.c: update a stale comment on "struct match_attr"
Message-ID: <CAPc5daU248vqPwWiNzJf3gKJnO=SqngUSpT-BEdT2t91ScbBCg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kZW6GRC8As5oX6CXbTarcU86x_+e8=ksABQubXJGkVhiQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> wrote:
>> - * If is_macro is false, then u.pattern points at the filename pattern
>> - * to which the rule applies.  (The memory pointed to is part of the
>> - * memory block allocated for the match_attr instance.)
>> + * If is_macro is false, then u.pat is the filename pattern to which the
>> + * rule applies.
>
> and we don't need to talk about memory ownership here as that
> is clear for 'struct pattern' documented elsewhere?

It is embedded in the structure which you cannot lose independently, no?