Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 11:44:36AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > OK, having now read both completely, I would say I have a vague >> > preference for my version since it keeps the include at the top and >> > unconditional, and has slightly more information in the patch message. >> > >> > But I do not prefer it so much over yours that I would be sad if you had >> > already queued yours and didn't want to bother shuffling it around. >> >> I do not have much preference between the two, either. Both lack >> one important description that we are reasonably confident that this >> breakage is limited to run-command.c and no other files. > > I believe that mine does: > > (Everything else compiles fine when NO_PTHREADS is defined, so this is > the only spot that needs fixing). Not quite. Who says NO_PTHREADS is the only conditional that may hide use of ALLOC_GROW()?
