HI Denton
On 09/12/2019 19:19, Denton Liu wrote:
the "lockstep" thing was what I was going for. That's why I ended
up using one monolithic function instead of several smaller ones. That
way, the caller can just blindly pass in values and then use the values
returned to set its own state (i.e. how 4/5 does it). Also, it would
ensure that future developers using this function won't forget to set
the corresponding show_notes variable to whatever value is appropriate.
The reason why we can't accept `revs` is because this series attempts to
stop depending on `revs` for the notes configuration entirely. That way,
we can call git_config() before repo_init_revisions() since we won't
need to have `revs` initialised.
I considered accepting an `int *` instead of using the return value to
make the intent more explicit but I didn't do that because the return
value seemed easier to deal with.
Does your explanation: "this series attempts to stop depending on `revs`
for the notes configuration entirely." need adding adding to the commit
message? I.e. the "abstract away" phrase probably doesn't carry enough
information/context.p
Maybe pick out some of the explanations for the commit message for
future readers?
Philip
