Re: [PATCH 2/6] Specify explicitly where we parse timestamps

From

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

Date

Feb 27, 2017, 22:51 UTC

Message-ID

<xmqqh93fmemg.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

In-Reply-To

<xmqqwpcbmfai.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

>> -	unsigned long number = strtoul(date, &end, 10);
>> +	time_t number = parse_timestamp(date, &end, 10);
>
> This hunk does not belong to this step.  Everybody else in this step

obviously I meant "the left half of this hunk" ;-)

> still receives parse_timestamp()'s return value in ulong, not time_t.
> I presume that that will happen in the final step 6/6 (which could
> be a huge patch that exceeds 100k?)