"brian m. carlson" <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > All of the callers already pass the hash member of struct object_id, so > update them to pass a pointer to the struct directly, > > This transformation was done with an update to declaration and > definition and the following semantic patch: > > @@ > expression E1, E2, E3, E4; > @@ > - resolve_refdup(E1, E2, E3.hash, E4) > + resolve_refdup(E1, E2, &E3, E4) > > @@ > expression E1, E2, E3, E4; > @@ > - resolve_refdup(E1, E2, E3->hash, E4) > + resolve_refdup(E1, E2, E3, E4) > > Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- As I mentioned in my response to the cover letter, quite a many of these now pass NULL (i.e. "I do not care what commit the HEAD is at; I only am interested in which branch I am on"), making major part of this patch irrelevant. The conflict resolution is trivial, and I do not think rebasing is worth it, though.
