Re: [PATCH 1/4] refspec: trivial cleanup

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

 



Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 06:46:46PM -0600, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>
>> We can remove one level of indentation and make the code clearer. So why
>> not do so?
>
> I know your question was rhetorical, but a good reason not to do so in
> general is that the existing pattern reveals some intent. E.g., it
> sometimes is the case that with the _current_ code we can return early
> from a function or loop, but that is not inherent to what the code is
> doing, and the early return or continue makes it harder to understand
> that.
>
> I don't think that is the case here, though. The continue actually
> expresses the intent more clearly than the existing code.
>
> So the patch looks good to me (as do the others in the series).

Yup, the patch text (eh, the source with the patch applied) looks
good.  I'd agree with your hintand would take rhetorical question
out of the log message while queuing.

Thanks.



[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