mkoegler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Martin Koegler) writes:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 07:08:39PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> ...
>> > + while (parents) {
>> > + result = walk((struct object*)parents->item, OBJ_COMMIT, data);
>> > + if (result)
>> > + return result;
>> > + parents = parents->next;
>> > + }
>> > + return 0;
>> > +}
>>
>> Hmm. For the purpose of proving there is _no_ error (or an
>> error or more), it would be Ok to return early like this, but
>> won't there be cases where you would want to get as many
>> coverage as possible?
>>
>> For example, I do not think you can use this to mark reachable
>> objects. Even if you find error walking the first parent
>> history, you would want to still mark a healthy second parent
>> history reachable.
>
> How should I define the return value of fsck_walk in the presence of
> multiple errors?
Returning error is fine. That is not what I was talking about.
I was talking about an early return in the code, that does not
callback once you find an error.
-
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
