Mike Hommey <mh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 10:59:41PM -0200, André Goddard Rosa wrote:
>> --- a/fast-import.c
>> +++ b/fast-import.c
>> @@ -2304,11 +2304,13 @@ int main(int argc, const char **argv)
>> else if (!prefixcmp(a, "--export-marks="))
>> mark_file = a + 15;
>> else if (!prefixcmp(a, "--export-pack-edges=")) {
>> + char *filename = a + 20;
>> +
>> if (pack_edges)
>> fclose(pack_edges);
>> - pack_edges = fopen(a + 20, "a");
>> + pack_edges = fopen(filename, "a");
>> if (!pack_edges)
>> - die("Cannot open %s: %s", a + 20, strerror(errno));
>> + die("Cannot open %s: %s", filename, strerror(errno));
>> } else if (!strcmp(a, "--force"))
>> force_update = 1;
>> else if (!strcmp(a, "--quiet"))
>
> Normally, the compiler takes care of such optimizations. It actually
> takes care of it much better than you can do yourself, and doing it
> yourself can even sometimes generate less optimized code because it
> gets in the compiler optimizations'way.
True, but I think another point of the patch is to address the
risk of two instances of "+ 20" going out of sync if/when the
option parsing is updated.
Not that I think André meant the patch as defensive coding (the
subject suggests it was meant to be a micro-optimization), nor
this is the good way to address that risk factor (parse-options
may be a better match for it).
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
