# [PATCH] lock_any_ref_for_update(): clarify switch case statement 2 messages from 2011-05-10 to 2011-05-10. Participants: Michael Schubert, Junio C Hamano. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/27313 ## Michael Schubert, 2011-05-10 11:48 Subject: [PATCH] lock_any_ref_for_update(): clarify switch case statement Message-ID: <4DC925F1.4060307@elegosoft.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/4DC925F1.4060307%40elegosoft.com ``` Write CHECK_REF_FORMAT_OK instead of '0' to be more verbose. Signed-off-by: Michael Schubert --- refs.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/refs.c b/refs.c index e3c0511..67d6bbd 100644 --- a/refs.c +++ b/refs.c @@ -1092,7 +1092,7 @@ struct ref_lock *lock_any_ref_for_update(const char *ref, const unsigned char *o switch (check_ref_format(ref)) { default: return NULL; - case 0: + case CHECK_REF_FORMAT_OK: case CHECK_REF_FORMAT_ONELEVEL: return lock_ref_sha1_basic(ref, old_sha1, flags, NULL); } -- 1.7.5.1 ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2011-05-10 20:07 Subject: Re: [PATCH] lock_any_ref_for_update(): clarify switch case statement Message-ID: <7vliyeiaju.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vliyeiaju.fsf%40alter.siamese.dyndns.org In-Reply-To: <4DC925F1.4060307@elegosoft.com> ``` Michael Schubert writes: > Write CHECK_REF_FORMAT_OK instead of '0' to be more verbose. It is not wrong per-se to spell it out to be more descriptive, but I would think 0 is clear enough that there is no error. In any case, being verbose is never a goal ;-). ```