Re: [PATCH v2 09/18] unpack-trees: add a new update_sparsity() function

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 23, 2020, 20:24 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqo8sm4y6w.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <5a83259e-af03-1930-a62b-75ad37b05f37@gmail.com>

Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

>>>> +int update_sparsity(struct unpack_trees_options *options);
>>>> +
>>>
>>> This appears to not use the enum as it should.
>> 
>> Whoops!  Will fix.  (Interesting that the compiler didn't flag any
>> kind of warning based on mismatch of declared function return types
>> for update_sparsity() in the .c and .h files...)
>
> *shrug* enums are essentially decoration over an int, so I'm not
> surprised it can happen.

;-)

Yeah, the value of preferring enum over preprocessor macros because it helps debuggers to show symbolic constants, is oversold, I think. Types of variables and functions' return values need to be set to the enum or the benefit won't come to us X-<.