On 24/05/13 10:17AM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > We sometimes pass the refatble write options as value and sometimes as a s/refatble/reftable > pointer. This is quite confusing and makes the reader wonder whether the > options get modified sometimes. > > In fact, `reftable_new_writer()` does cause the caller-provided options > to get updated when some values aren't set up. This is quite unexpected, > but didn't cause any harm until now. > > Adapt the code so that we do not modify the caller-provided values > anymore. While at it, refactor the code to code to consistently pass the > options as a constant pointer to clarify that the caller-provided opts > will not ever get modified. Doesn't really matter, but would it be more accurate to say "pointer to a constant type"? Overall, I like this change. Improves consistency and readability :) -Justin
