Antoine Pelisse <apelisse@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> diff --git a/builtin/blame.c b/builtin/blame.c
> index dd4aff9..86450e3 100644
> --- a/builtin/blame.c
> +++ b/builtin/blame.c
> ...
> @@ -1356,51 +1356,61 @@ static void get_ac_line(const char *inbuf, const char *what,
> len = strlen(tmp);
> else
> len = endp - tmp;
>
> if (split_ident_line(&ident, tmp, len)) {
> error_out:
> /* Ugh */
> + tmp = "(unknown)";
> + strbuf_addstr(name, tmp);
> + strbuf_addstr(mail, tmp);
> + strbuf_addstr(tz, tmp);
> *time = 0;
> return;
> }
>
> namelen = ident.name_end - ident.name_begin;
> + tmpname = ident.name_begin;
>
> + maillen = ident.mail_end - ident.mail_begin;
> + tmpmail = ident.mail_begin;
>
> *time = strtoul(ident.date_begin, NULL, 10);
>
> + len = ident.tz_end - ident.tz_begin;
> + strbuf_add(tz, ident.tz_begin, len);
>
> /*
> * Now, convert both name and e-mail using mailmap
> */
> + map_user(&mailmap, &tmpmail, &maillen,
> + &tmpname, &namelen);
I like the general simplification this change gives us, but do we
still want to name these variables "tmp"-something? At least to me,
it makes it look like the variable holds a pointer to a piece of
memory that was temporarily allocated. Calling it "mail_begin" or
something might be less confusing.
The changes to pretty.c (pp_user_info) and shortlog.c
(insert_one_record) calls these variables mailbuf and namebuf,
so perhaps these are better names?
--
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