Re: [PATCH 5/6] convert object type handling from a string to a number

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

 



On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:

> Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I am wondering if "enum object_type" and signed comparison here
> > are compatible.  sha1_object_info() is of type "int" so that is
> > clearly signed, but are we safe assuming this would not result
> > in "type is unsigned and condition is always false"?
> 
> See my recent patch; I actually rewrote those hunks to use OBJ_BAD
> rather than < 0, as this cleans things up for my packv4.

I'd prefer if < 0 remained though.  That way we can use negative values 
for any kind of error status.  And for kernel hackers this is a pretty 
common idiom.  And it uses less line realestate.

Actually OBJ_BAD could be assigned the value -1 and OBJ_MAX used to 
verify the object number is within range.  That would unify things and 
make the code a bit more logical.


Nicolas
-
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]