Re: [PATCH 5/6] convert object type handling from a string to a number
- From
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
- Date
- Feb 27, 2007, 15:33 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LRH.0.82.0702271029060.29426@xanadu.home>
- In-Reply-To
- <20070227150126.GA3230@spearce.org>
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote: > > I am wondering if "enum object_type" and signed comparison here > > are compatible. sha1_object_info() is of type "int" so that is > > clearly signed, but are we safe assuming this would not result > > in "type is unsigned and condition is always false"? > > See my recent patch; I actually rewrote those hunks to use OBJ_BAD > rather than < 0, as this cleans things up for my packv4.
I'd prefer if < 0 remained though. That way we can use negative values for any kind of error status. And for kernel hackers this is a pretty common idiom. And it uses less line realestate.
Actually OBJ_BAD could be assigned the value -1 and OBJ_MAX used to verify the object number is within range. That would unify things and make the code a bit more logical.
Nicolas