On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:27:35PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote: > > Would a union be more appropriate here? We do not ever have to pass it > > directly as a parameter, since we pass the "struct config_source" to the > > method functions. > > > > It's still possible to screw up using a union, but it's slightly harder > > than screwing up using a void pointer. And I do not think we need the > > run-time flexibility offered by the void pointer in this case. > > No we do not need the void pointer flexibility. But that means every new > source would need to add to this union. Junio complained about that fact > when I first added the extra members directly to the struct. A union > does not waste that much space and we get some seperation using the > union members. Since this struct is local only I think that should be > ok. Right. I think that is not a big deal, as we are not exposing this struct outside of the config.c; any additions would need to add a new git_config_from_foo function, anyway. -Peff -- 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