shejialuo <shejialuo@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I agree with you here, I use way too general words to describe what > happens. I will improve this. Actually, I feel hard to find words for > "MSG_REF_MISSING_NEWLINE". I think we should say: > > LF should be at the end of the file. Giving a human-readable message when we have an enum can be done at a lot higher layer with the current way the fsck_report_ref() function is used (i.e. in that function, not by its callers). That is what I meant by "misdesigned"---if one message enum always corresponds to one human-readable message, there is not much point in forcing callers to supply both, is there?
