From: Erik Faye-Lund Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 14:08:24 GMT Subject: Re: [patch 02/16] const-expr.patch Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20100427135812.656626000@mlists.thewrittenword.com> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > Index: b/unpack-trees.c > =================================================================== > --- a/unpack-trees.c > +++ b/unpack-trees.c > @@ -287,9 +287,11 @@ static void add_same_unmerged(struct cac >  static int unpack_index_entry(struct cache_entry *ce, >                              struct unpack_trees_options *o) >  { > -       struct cache_entry *src[5] = { ce, NULL, }; > +       struct cache_entry *src[5] = { NULL, NULL }; You don't need NULL twice when the array-size is specified, it's just confusing as the array has 5 elements. > Index: b/builtin/commit.c > =================================================================== > --- a/builtin/commit.c > +++ b/builtin/commit.c > @@ -717,7 +717,8 @@ static int prepare_to_commit(const char > >        if (use_editor) { >                char index[PATH_MAX]; > -               const char *env[2] = { index, NULL }; > +               const char *env[] = { NULL, NULL }; Why not "const char *env[2] = { NULL };", as it's shorter? > Index: b/builtin/cat-file.c > =================================================================== > --- a/builtin/cat-file.c > +++ b/builtin/cat-file.c > @@ -118,7 +118,9 @@ static int cat_one_file(int opt, const c > >                /* custom pretty-print here */ >                if (type == OBJ_TREE) { > -                       const char *ls_args[3] = {"ls-tree", obj_name, NULL}; > +                       const char *ls_args[3] = { NULL, NULL, NULL }; Again, you don't need to repeat NULL. -- Erik "kusma" Faye-Lund