shejialuo <shejialuo@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> The original code explicitly specifies the ".path" field to initialize
> the "fsck_ref_report" structure. However, it introduces confusion how we
> initialize the other fields.
The above description is a bit too strong than what this patch is
actually fixing. If you explicitly initialize any member of an
aggregate type, other members not mentioned will be implicitly
0-initialized, so the original does not give any confusion to
readers who know what they are reading.
What the patch improves is that the common idiom used in this
code base (and possibly elsewhere) is to use "{ 0 }", instead
of explicitly saying "this particular member is 0-initialized".
The original code explicitly initializes the "path" member in
the "struct fsck_ref_report" to NULL (which implicitly
0-initializes other members in the struct). It is more
customary to use "{ 0 }" to express that we are 0-initializing
everything.
The patch is correct, but spelling it like "{ 0 }" with a space on both
sides is more common [*], and because this patch is all about making it
more idiomatic, let's write it that way.
Thanks.
[Footnote]
* "git grep -e '{0};' -e '{ 0 };' '*.[ch]'" tells us so.
> Mentored-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx>
> Mentored-by: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: shejialuo <shejialuo@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> refs/files-backend.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c
> index 8d6ec9458d..d6fc3bd67c 100644
> --- a/refs/files-backend.c
> +++ b/refs/files-backend.c
> @@ -3446,7 +3446,7 @@ static int files_fsck_refs_name(struct ref_store *ref_store UNUSED,
> goto cleanup;
>
> if (check_refname_format(iter->basename, REFNAME_ALLOW_ONELEVEL)) {
> - struct fsck_ref_report report = { .path = NULL };
> + struct fsck_ref_report report = {0};
>
> strbuf_addf(&sb, "%s/%s", refs_check_dir, iter->relative_path);
> report.path = sb.buf;
