Re: [PATCHv4 1/4] Refactor for_each_ref variants to use for_each_ref_in and avoid magic numbers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



This patch series would surely benefit from a cover letter...

Jamey Sharp <jamey@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> From: Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Several variants of the for_each_ref functions call do_for_each_ref with
> both a fixed string prefix and the hardcoded length of that prefix.
> Furthermore, for_each_ref and for_each_ref_submodule passed "refs/" but
> a length of 0, which caused do_for_each_ref to ignore the "refs/".
[...]

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland
ShadeHawk on #git
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]