Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] remove extern from function declarations
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Apr 30, 2019, 23:21 UTC
- Message-ID
- <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1904301919580.45@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>
- In-Reply-To
- <20190425120758.GD8695@szeder.dev>
Hi,
On Thu, 25 Apr 2019, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
Show 26 quoted lines
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 05:49:01PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 12:58:31AM -0700, Denton Liu wrote: > > > > compat/mingw.c | 2 +- > > > compat/mingw.h | 6 +- > > > compat/nedmalloc/malloc.c.h | 6 +- > > > compat/obstack.h | 14 +- > > > compat/poll/poll.h | 2 +- > > > compat/regex/regex.h | 66 ++--- > > > compat/win32/pthread.h | 8 +- > > > > We sometimes avoid touching compat/ code for style issues because it's > > copied from elsewhere. And diverging from upstream is more evil than a > > pure style issue. So potentially we could drop these hunks (though I > > think maybe mingw is our own thing?). > > > > > contrib/coccinelle/noextern.cocci | 6 + > > > > I have mixed feelings on this cocci script. > > I have actual bad experience with this :) > > v4 of this patch series excluded 'compat/' from the conversion, but > the semantic patch is applied to 'compat/' all the same, resulting in > failed CI builds because of the four 'extern's in 'compat/obstack.h', > and will continue to do so.
Is it not possible to exclude certain directories for certain semantic patches?
I guess we could also simply declare that *all* Coccinelle patches should leave `compat/` alone, on the basis that those files are likely coming from some sort of upstream. But then, `compat/mingw.c` and `compat/win32/` seem not to fall into that category...
Ciao, Dscho