Re: [PATCH] progress: pay attention to (customized) delay time

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Aug 25, 2025, 18:50 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq8qj7qlqf.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <jq5ul4zwdex6peuub3upwzxz3d5zcnuh7adseyg6wa6dpiu4ci@fuwe2t2vbguo>

Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón <carenas@gmail.com> writes:

Show 17 quoted lines

> On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 10:00:25AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> 
>> >  	struct strbuf *counters_sb = &progress->counters_sb;
>> >  	int show_update = 0;
>> > +	sig_atomic_t update = progress_update;
>> 
>> It is somewhat misleading to use sig_atomic_t for "update", which is
>> never updated via the signal handler.  It confused me a bit during
>> my initial reading.  If it were
>> 
>> 	int update = !!progress_update;
>> 
>> it would have made it more obvious what is going on, at least to me.
>
> In that case, I would suggest doing instead:
>
>   bool update = !!progress_update;

Any conventional type we would use for "is it set or not?" that is not sig_atomic_t is good enough in this context.

The fact that we started adopting "bool" in new code is orthogonal and a bit off the point.