Junio, Johannes,
Thank you for your feedback.
> But the patch is good as-is, given especially the way how xecfg is
> cleared the same way in builtin/merge-tree.c::show_diff().
I just wanted to explain that I initially planned to take the "= { 0 }"
approach and I started checking whether all xpparam_t structures in the
source tree are stack-allocated, but I quickly noticed that, as Junio
pointed out, existing code showed an inclination towards memset(), so I
settled for that instead.
> Will queue. Thanks.
I have a process question: since the other two patches in this patch
series will need a v3, would you like me to keep bundling patch 1 in
this series or should I only send revised version of patches 2 & 3 in
v3?
--
Best regards,
Michał Kępień
