Hi,
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, Bert Wesarg wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 22:26, Johannes Schindelin
> <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, Bert Wesarg wrote:
> >
> >> Signed-off-by: Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> rerere.c | 6 ++++--
> >> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > Looks good to me, except...
> >
> >> diff --git a/rerere.c b/rerere.c
> >> index d1d3e75..9ca4cb8 100644
> >> --- a/rerere.c
> >> +++ b/rerere.c
> >> @@ -364,16 +364,17 @@ static int find_conflict(struct string_list *conflict)
> >> static int merge(const char *name, const char *path)
> >> {
> >> int ret;
> >> - mmfile_t cur, base, other;
> >> + mmfile_t cur = {NULL, 0}, base = {NULL, 0}, other = {NULL, 0};
> >> mmbuffer_t result = {NULL, 0};
> >>
> >> if (handle_file(path, NULL, rerere_path(name, "thisimage")) < 0)
> >> return 1;
> >>
> >> + ret = 1;
> >
> > This initialization can come earlier, at declaration time.
> I thought about it, but I think it is clearer to put just in front of
> the condition which may fail.
Well, to _this_ developer, it is clearer when a variable has been
initialized in any case. No need to think about how it could be used
uninitialized. But if you insist...
Ciao,
Dscho