Re: [PATCH] Small cache_tree_write refactor.

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

 



Hi,

On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Pierre Habouzit wrote:

> --- a/cache-tree.c
> +++ b/cache-tree.c
> @@ -369,10 +369,8 @@ int cache_tree_update(struct cache_tree *it,
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static void write_one(struct cache_tree *it,
> -		       char *path,
> -		       int pathlen,
> -			   struct strbuf *buffer)
> +static void write_one(struct strbuf *buffer, struct cache_tree *it,
> +                      const char *path, int pathlen)

I don't know... is this really needed?  In some other projects, the coding 
standard prefers the parameters in "in"..."out" order.

Ciao,
Dscho

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[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