On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 09:54:46AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 09:51:06AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > > > I think rewrite_here needs to be a direct pointer into the buffer, since > > we plan to modify it. > > > > I think rewrite_with is correct to be an object_id. It's either the oid > > passed in from the caller, or the subtree we generated (in which case > > it's the result from write_object_file). > > > > So the "most correct" thing is probably something like this: > > Of course, it would be nice if what I sent compiled. ;) > > rewrite_here does double duty: it's the pointer in the tree that we need > to rewrite, and it's also the oid we pass down recursively. So we have > to handle both cases, like so: Since I took most of the patch you wrote, may I apply your sign-off to the resulting patch I send out? -- brian m. carlson: Houston, Texas, US OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
