Re: [PATCH 1/2] Modified flag field type in rev_list_info struct in bisect.h. There is no need for flag field to be signed, as it is not supposed to be used as decimal.

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

 



Yep. Thanks for your remarks. I have made a bit more research about using old rev_list_info struct (with signed int flag) and realized, that it doesn't appear in expressions, where using signed integer will differ from unsigned one. I'll take using 'unsigned' instead of 'unsigned int' in account, so if needed, I can remake the patch in order to get it accepted.

On 03/25/2016 09:18 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Maybe my exposure to the code was accidentally in a way such that
I ever only saw the version without int.
The older part of the code tends to spell flag words with "unsigned"
without "int", which is primarily historical fault of mine.


--
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]