On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 02:31:38PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > If this goes on top as a standalone patch, then the reason why it is > separate from the other users of _default() is not because the way > it uses the null return is special, but because it was written by a > different author, I would think. Mostly I was just concerned that we missed a somewhat subtle bug in the first conversion, and I think it's worth calling out in the commit message why that callsite must be converted in a particular way. Whether that happens in a separate commit or squashed, I don't care too much. But I dunno. Maybe it is obvious now that the correct code is in there. ;) -Peff
