Re: [PATCH v11 06/13] ref-filter: add option to filter out tags, branches and remotes

From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Date: Aug 17, 2015, 05:14 UTC
Message-ID: <CAPig+cQjtFHZgUvCVxTcXRCPykFN=RG5=bvkqF04h1MupPJV5g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cTZvSW8ZRLFLhmQTYBwotVjMWANZy0OAZHpA79vW8GfGQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com> wrote:
>> -       if (type & (FILTER_REFS_ALL | FILTER_REFS_INCLUDE_BROKEN))
>> -               ret = for_each_rawref(ref_filter_handler, &ref_cbdata);
>> -       else if (type & FILTER_REFS_ALL)
>> -               ret = for_each_ref(ref_filter_handler, &ref_cbdata);
>> -       else if (type)
>> +       if (type & FILTER_REFS_INCLUDE_BROKEN) {
>> +               type -= FILTER_REFS_INCLUDE_BROKEN;
>
> The above is a somewhat unusual way to say the more idiomatic:
>
>     type &= ~FILTER_REFS_INCLUDE_BROKEN;
>
> when dealing with bit flags. Is there precedence elsewhere in the
> project for choosing '-' over '~'?

s/precedence/precedent/