Re: [PATCH 3/6] refs.c: replace write_str_in_full by write_in_full

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

 



On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 03:23:42PM -0800, Stefan Beller wrote:

> There is another occurrence where we could have used write_str_in_full
> (line 3107: write_in_full(lock->lk->fd, &term, 1)), so the current state
> is inconsistent. This replaces the only occurrence of write_str_in_full
> by write_in_full, so we only need to wrap write_in_full in the next patch.

I had to read the first sentence a few times to figure out what you
meant. But I am not sure it is even relevant. We do not care about the
inconsistency. It is just "we are about to change how callers of
write_in_full in this file behave, the wrapper gets in the way, and it
does not add enough value by itself to merit making our future changes
in two places".

-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




[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]