Re: [PATCH 06/10] get_short_sha1: NUL-terminate hex prefix
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Sep 26, 2016, 17:36 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqk2dytvet.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20160926172516.frftagyt6aycp75q@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> I left the second one in to make the intention more explicit, and so > readers did not have to worry that the NULs were overwritten in the > loop. I'd be OK with it either way, though.
Yes, I agree with that it is a good thing to make our intention more explicit and I am perfectly fine with leaving it as-is.
Thanks.