Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> @@ -679,15 +682,20 @@ static int print_ref_list(int kinds, int detached, int verbose, int abbrev, stru
> if (verbose)
> maxwidth = calc_maxwidth(&ref_list, strlen(remote_prefix));
>
> - qsort(ref_list.list, ref_list.index, sizeof(struct ref_item), ref_cmp);
> + index = ref_list.index;
> +
> + /* Print detached HEAD before sorting and printing the rest */
> + if (detached && (ref_list.list[index - 1].kind == REF_DETACHED_HEAD) &&
> + !strcmp(ref_list.list[index - 1].name, head)) {
> + print_ref_item(&ref_list.list[index - 1], maxwidth, verbose, abbrev,
> + 1, remote_prefix);
> + index -= 1;
> + }
I think Eric already mentionned it, but I don't remember the conclusion
and can't find it in the archives. Wouldn't it be cleaner to actually
remove the detached head from the array (do "ref_list.index -= 1"
instead of "index -= 1", and possibly free() what needs to be freed?
If you did so, you wouldn't have any possible confusion between the
local variable "index" and ref_list.index in the code below:
> - detached = (detached && (kinds & REF_LOCAL_BRANCH));
> - if (detached && match_patterns(pattern, "HEAD"))
> - show_detached(&ref_list, maxwidth);
> + qsort(ref_list.list, index, sizeof(struct ref_item), ref_cmp);
>
> - for (i = 0; i < ref_list.index; i++) {
> - int current = !detached &&
> - (ref_list.list[i].kind == REF_LOCAL_BRANCH) &&
> + for (i = 0; i < index; i++) {
> + int current = !detached && (ref_list.list[i].kind == REF_LOCAL_BRANCH) &&
> !strcmp(ref_list.list[i].name, head);
> print_ref_item(&ref_list.list[i], maxwidth, verbose,
> abbrev, current, remote_prefix);
--
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