On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 08:14:41PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote: > > I dunno. Maybe I am being overly picky. The .idx code already does it > > like this, and I believe the index (as in .git/index) does, too. We have > > run into problems (as in b5007211b6 (pack-bitmap: do not use gcc packed > > attribute, 2014-11-27)), but that was due to a more odd-sized struct, as > > well as using sizeof(). > > How about a set of follow-up patches to address all of these spots at > the same time? That would allow us to move forward here (which is safe > to do, as you note), and address all of these instances together > uniformly. > > Sound good? That sounds fine to me. TBH, I am probably OK if that cleanup never happens, as long as nobody finds that it is a problem on there platform. I do wonder if we should provide more guidance about what is OK and what is not in CodingGuidelines, but I have a feeling it would end up to esoteric to be generally useful. -Peff
