On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:37:29AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > Hmm. This should probably be: > > dst->peer_ref = src->peer_ref ? copy_ref(src->peer_ref) : NULL; > > (or copy_ref should return NULL when given NULL). I also wonder if the > copied ref's peer_ref should be explicitly NULL'd. BTW, all of my "probably" and "I wonder" here are because I think the "peer ref" pointer is a little vague as a concept. E.g., I think in most cases src->peer_ref->peer_ref != src. Rather than having ref structs with "next" and "peer" pointers, I think a more natural data structure would be a list (or array) of "ref pairs". But you didn't create that with this series, and I don't think it is worth the major surgery to change it now. -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
