Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
What is this for? No explanation?
> diff --git a/xdiff-interface.c b/xdiff-interface.c
> index 0e2c169..c5684b4 100644
> --- a/xdiff-interface.c
> +++ b/xdiff-interface.c
> @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ int parse_hunk_header(char *line, int len,
> return -!!memcmp(cp, " @@", 3);
> }
>
> -static void consume_one(void *priv_, char *s, unsigned long size)
> +static int consume_one(void *priv_, char *s, unsigned long size)
> {
> struct xdiff_emit_state *priv = priv_;
> char *ep;
> @@ -64,10 +64,12 @@ static void consume_one(void *priv_, char *s, unsigned long size)
> unsigned long this_size;
> ep = memchr(s, '\n', size);
> this_size = (ep == NULL) ? size : (ep - s + 1);
> - priv->consume(priv->consume_callback_data, s, this_size);
> + if (priv->consume(priv->consume_callback_data, s, this_size))
> + return -1;
> size -= this_size;
> s += this_size;
> }
> + return 0;
> }
Returning a negative value implies that this is an error condition. Should
all "non-zero" returns from ->consume necessarily be considered error?
The same comment applies to the new "return -1" in the rest of the patch.
--
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