On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 09:49:06AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Shoot. Thanks for spotting.
>
> Wouldn't it be enough to do:
>
> for (i = 0, recovered = 0; recovered < trimmed && i <= ctx; i++) {
> while (recovered < trimmed && ap[recovered++] != '\n')
> ; /* nothing */
> }
>
> then (warning: I haven't had my coffee yet)?
Yes, I think that is equivalent. My sleep-deprived brain keeps thinking
there must be a more clear way of writing this whole loop, but it
escapes me at the moment.
-Peff
-
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
