Re: [PATCH v5] branch: support for shortcuts like @{-1}, completed

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Oct 10, 2022, 16:55 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqzge34nzp.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <bf4a45cb-2f44-88bd-e12e-98ca31d5bbd4@gmail.com>

Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com> writes:

Show 9 quoted lines

>> If we have a big common clean-up after each operation, then, falling
>> through in the success case might be good, but that is not what I am
>> seeing here.  So...
>> 
>
> I would like to see some kind of free(head) in a clean-up to not get
> distracted with that.  Not a proper leak though and the leak checkers
> does not refer to that as leak.  So not important.  We can go with the
> unconditional return and let the dust settle.

"head" is not leaking, as a pointer to it is head in a location that is still in scope (namely, a file-scope global variable) when the program exits.

In fact, the only thing the code before or after this patch does after leaving this top-level if/elseif/else cascade is to return 0 and doing nothing else. Inserting free(head) would be an unneeded distraction for human developers (doing such a patch, reviewing, and even worse, having to read the resulting code in the coming years) and waste of computer resources (exiting the process will reclaim such a piece of memory just fine).