Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] Take four on fixing OPT_SET_PTR issues
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Mar 31, 2014, 22:54 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqy4zq0yj9.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20140331210714.GA6422@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
Show 11 quoted lines
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:23:44AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> SET_PTR() may not be used, but are there places where SET_INT() is >> abused with a cast-to-pointer for the same effect? I didn't check, >> but if there are such places, converting them to use SET_PTR() with >> their existing cast removed may be a better way to go. > > Anyone doing that should be beaten with a clue stick. > > Fortunately, I grepped through and I did not see any cases. My clue > stick remains untouched.
Yeah, I quickly did the same after sending the message out.
Perhaps instead of taking all these three patches, it may be a good idea to just queue a single patch to remove both the feature and the "string (unset)" bit from the test.
Thanks.