Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> John Keeping <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> diff --git a/graph.c b/graph.c
>> index 391a712..2a3fc5c 100644
>> --- a/graph.c
>> +++ b/graph.c
>> @@ -1227,6 +1227,16 @@ void graph_show_commit(struct git_graph *graph)
>> if (!graph)
>> return;
>>
>> + /*
>> + * When showing a diff of a merge against each of its parents, we
>> + * are called once for each parent without graph_update having been
>> + * called. In this case, simply output a single padding line.
>> + */
>> + if (graph_is_commit_finished(graph)) {
>> + graph_show_padding(graph);
>> + shown_commit_line = 1;
>> + }
>> +
>> while (!shown_commit_line && !graph_is_commit_finished(graph)) {
>
> This works, but if we know we're not going to enter the while loop, it
> seams even easier to do this:
>
> --- a/graph.c
> +++ b/graph.c
> @@ -1227,7 +1227,17 @@ void graph_show_commit(struct git_graph *graph)
> if (!graph)
> return;
>
> - while (!shown_commit_line && !graph_is_commit_finished(graph)) {
> + /*
> + * When showing a diff of a merge against each of its parents, we
> + * are called once for each parent without graph_update having been
> + * called. In this case, simply output a single padding line.
> + */
> + if (graph_is_commit_finished(graph)) {
> + graph_show_padding(graph);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + while (!shown_commit_line) {
> shown_commit_line = graph_next_line(graph, &msgbuf);
> fwrite(msgbuf.buf, sizeof(char), msgbuf.len, stdout);
> if (!shown_commit_line)
In this particular case, with the current state of this function, it
is probably OK, but an early return like this tend to be a source of
future bugs in the longer term, to make the codeflow skip whatever
necessary clean-up that needs to be done after the loop exits.
--
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