2009/8/10 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx>:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
>> index f407bf5..d087112 100644
>> --- a/unpack-trees.c
>> +++ b/unpack-trees.c
>> @@ -530,8 +530,10 @@ int unpack_trees(unsigned len, struct tree_desc *t, struct unpack_trees_options
>> if (o->trivial_merges_only && o->nontrivial_merge)
>> return unpack_failed(o, "Merge requires file-level merging");
>>
>> - if (run_sparse_hook(o))
>> - return unpack_failed(o, NULL);
>> + if (!o->no_sparse_hook) {
>> + if (run_sparse_hook(o))
>> + return unpack_failed(o, NULL);
>> + }
>>
>
> IMHO this would read nicelier as
>
> if (!o->no_sparse_hook && run_sparse_hook(o))
> return unpack_failed(o, NULL);
Right.
>> diff --git a/unpack-trees.h b/unpack-trees.h
>> index ad21823..81eb2ef 100644
>> --- a/unpack-trees.h
>> +++ b/unpack-trees.h
>> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ struct unpack_trees_options {
>> skip_unmerged,
>> initial_checkout,
>> diff_index_cached,
>> + no_sparse_hook,
>> gently;
>
> Hmm. I understand that the assumption is that memset(&opts, 0,
> sizeof(opts)); should give you a sensible default, but I cannot avoid
> noticing that "no_sparse_hook = 0" is a double negation, something to be
> avoided...
skip_sparse_hook then? :-)
--
Duy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html