Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > A simpler fix to the first hunk may be to get rid of the > intermediate variable altogether and always refer to n->size > when its value is needed. The compiler should be able to see in > this static file-scope helper function that n->size would not change > at all and do the right thing (i.e. allocate a register to hold its > value at entry, if needed) without a hand-optimization we see in the > original code. > > The same can be said for the second hunk. The intermediate variable > is used only once, and one could argue that its presense obscures > the condition under which grow_decoration() is called by splitting a > logically single expression into two. > > Which one is easier to grok? > > unsigned nr = n->nr + 1; > if (nr > n->size * 2 / 3) > grow_decoration(n); > > or > > if ((n->nr + 1) > n->size * 2 / 3) > grow_decoration(n); Your suggestion makes sense to me, the second one is better. I will send an updated patch. I also found some more places in the file where a change from int to unsigned int should happen, but where int does not cause warnings. I will also include it in the patch. -- Regards, Arnav Bhate (He/Him)
