From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:33:55 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] convert object type handling from a string to a number
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:

> 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