Hi Duy,
On Wed, 3 May 2017, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> builtin/blame.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/blame.c b/builtin/blame.c
> index 07506a3e45..1648b396dc 100644
> --- a/builtin/blame.c
> +++ b/builtin/blame.c
> @@ -2071,10 +2071,12 @@ static int prepare_lines(struct scoreboard *sb)
> */
> static int read_ancestry(const char *graft_file)
> {
> - FILE *fp = fopen(graft_file, "r");
> + FILE *fp = fopen_or_warn(graft_file, "r");
> struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
> +
> if (!fp)
> return -1;
> +
> while (!strbuf_getwholeline(&buf, fp, '\n')) {
This is an excellent example to demonstrate why folding all conversions to
fopen_or_warn() into the same patch as introducing that function makes
sense: I had to close this mail, find the mail with the patch introducing
the function, verify that it returns NULL as before, close that mail, and
continue this reply.
Oh, and I do not think it is a good idea to introduce style fixes in the
middle of such a large patch series. It's a bit distracting from the real
meat here.
Ciao,
Dscho