Re: [PATCH v10.1 5/7] bisect: simplify the addition of new bisect terms

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

 



Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

>>  static int for_each_bad_bisect_ref(const char *submodule, each_ref_fn fn, void *cb_data)
>>  {
>> -	return for_each_ref_in_submodule(submodule, "refs/bisect/bad", fn, cb_data);
>> +	return for_each_bisect_ref(submodule, fn, cb_data, "bad");
>>  }
>
> Shouldn't this be passing name_bad instead of "bad"?
>
>>  
>>  static int for_each_good_bisect_ref(const char *submodule, each_ref_fn fn, void *cb_data)
>>  {
>> -	return for_each_ref_in_submodule(submodule, "refs/bisect/good", fn, cb_data);
>> +	return for_each_bisect_ref(submodule, fn, cb_data, "good");
>>  }
>
> Likewise.

Indeed. Fixed.

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/
--
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]