On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> @@ -2251,7 +2319,7 @@ static int match_fragment(struct image *img,
>> int match_beginning, int match_end)
>> {
>> int i;
>> - char *fixed_buf, *buf, *orig, *target;
>> + char *fixed_buf, *orig, *target;
>> struct strbuf fixed;
>> size_t fixed_len, postlen;
>> int preimage_limit;
>> @@ -2312,6 +2380,7 @@ static int match_fragment(struct image *img,
>> * There must be one non-blank context line that match
>> * a line before the end of img.
>> */
>> + char *buf;
>
> patches 1-4 looking good, with no comment from me. Here is the first spot to
> comment on.
>
> It's not clear why we need to declare buf here? Oh wait it is. It's just
> moved from the start of the function. But why do it in this patch?
> It seems unrelated to the general intent of the patch. No need to reroll
> for this nit alone, it just took me a while to figure out it was an unrelated
> thing.
Yeah, I agree it's a bit unrelated. But rather than add another patch
to an already long series just for this, I added the following to the
commit message:
While at it, let's reduce the scope of "char *buf" in match_fragment().
--
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