"Alex Riesen" <raa.lkml@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 3/14/07, Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > - return run_diff_files_cmd(&rev, argc, argv);
>> > + result = run_diff_files_cmd(&rev, argc, argv);
>> > + return rev.diffopt.diff_exit_code ? rev.diffopt.exit_code: result;
>> > }
>>
>> Yuck. Let's call the former "exit_with_status" (meaning, the
>> caller instructed us to do that) and the latter "has_changes".
>
> I like "exit_with_status". But has_changes looks confusing
> good near return value of run_diff_files_cmd, which "has"
> nothing. Or do you mean to highlight this "difference"?
Maybe 'found_changes' would be a better name, then?
if (exit_with_status)
return !!found_changes;
else
return result;
-
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