On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 08:40:56AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes: > > > The below diff would be needed on top of what you currently have in > > `seen`. In any case though, I can also resend this topic with > > ps/reftable-write-options pulled in as a dependency. Please let me know > > your preference. > > Is it "needed", in the sense that "without the fix what you posted > is broken in such and such ways", or is it "I think it is niceR to > have it on stack because this one instance does not have to be on > heap"? To me, they look equivalent and I have no problems with the > "nicer" variant, but your "needed" makes me wonder if I am missing > some correctness invariants I am violating without realizing. It's needed in the sense that your version leaks memory -- the `ti` pointer is never free'd. Other than that they are equivalent indeed. Patrick
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
