On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 08:11:05AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > I've mentioned before that I have a series which compiles cleanly with > -Wunused-parameters. I split this work roughly into three groups: > > 1. Patches that fix bugs (i.e., we should have been using the > parameter but didn't). > > 2. Patches that drop unused parameters (i.e., code cleanup). > > 3. Patches that annotate undroppable parameters (e.g., ones that are > present due to a callback interface). > > All of the patches from group 1 have been merged already. So this series > starts us off on group 2. There are about 50 patches in that group. > Given that none of them are urgent, I plan to feed them in batches to > avoid overwhelming reviewers. I'm also ordering them to avoid conflicts > with other topics in flight (this batch has no conflicts with 'next', > and only one minor textual conflict with 'pu'). All of these patches seemed straightforward. I did see a few where there may have originally been some consistency benefit to keeping parameters (always passing file name to *_to_worktree, for example), but I'm fine dropping them if it means we can get better development help from the compiler. I am also, for the record, in favor of ignoring the effects of relativity for the purposes of Git. :) -- brian m. carlson: Houston, Texas, US OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
