Re: [PATCH 3/6] unpack-trees: don't shadow global var the_index

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

 




On 05/06/18 16:43, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> This function mark_new_skip_worktree() has an argument named the_index
> which is also the name of a global variable. While they have different
> types (the global the_index is not a pointer) mistakes can easily
> happen and it's also confusing for readers. Rename the function
> argument to something other than the_index.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  unpack-trees.c | 9 ++++-----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
> index 5d06aa9c98..60d1138e08 100644
> --- a/unpack-trees.c
> +++ b/unpack-trees.c
> @@ -1231,7 +1231,7 @@ static int clear_ce_flags(struct cache_entry **cache, int nr,
>   * Set/Clear CE_NEW_SKIP_WORKTREE according to $GIT_DIR/info/sparse-checkout
>   */
>  static void mark_new_skip_worktree(struct exclude_list *el,
> -				   struct index_state *the_index,
> +				   struct index_state *istate,
>  				   int select_flag, int skip_wt_flag)
>  {
>  	int i;
> @@ -1240,8 +1240,8 @@ static void mark_new_skip_worktree(struct exclude_list *el,
>  	 * 1. Pretend the narrowest worktree: only unmerged entries
>  	 * are checked out
>  	 */
> -	for (i = 0; i < the_index->cache_nr; i++) {
> -		struct cache_entry *ce = the_index->cache[i];
> +	for (i = 0; i < istate->cache_nr; i++) {
> +		struct cache_entry *ce = istate->cache[i];
>  
>  		if (select_flag && !(ce->ce_flags & select_flag))
>  			continue;
> @@ -1256,8 +1256,7 @@ static void mark_new_skip_worktree(struct exclude_list *el,
>  	 * 2. Widen worktree according to sparse-checkout file.
>  	 * Matched entries will have skip_wt_flag cleared (i.e. "in")
>  	 */
> -	clear_ce_flags(the_index->cache, the_index->cache_nr,
> -		       select_flag, skip_wt_flag, el);
> +	clear_ce_flags(istate, select_flag, skip_wt_flag, el);

This looks a bit suspect. The clear_ce_flags() function has
not been modified to take a 'struct index_state *' as its first
parameter, right? (If you look back at the first hunk header, you
will see that it still takes 'struct cache_entry **, int, ...') ;-)

ATB,
Ramsay Jones




[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]

  Powered by Linux