Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:43:13PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: >> >> > +ifdef USE_SHA1DC >> > + LIB_OBJS += sha1dc/sha1.o >> > + LIB_OBJS += sha1dc/ubc_check.o >> > + BASIC_CFLAGS += -DSHA1_SHA1DC >> >> The name of this CPP symbol is one difference between this and >> Linus's version. Wouldn't "-DSHA1_DC" make more sense? > > I'm fine with either. Somehow SHA1_DC felt too short, but it doesn't > really matter in practice.
I'm fine with either, too. It was just double SHA1 felt a bit strange, when the naming convention was SHA1_ followed by the characteristic attribute of the implementation (e.g. came from Mozilla, etc.) and I thought "Detecting Collision" was the notable characteristic of this one. >> Another difference is that your version adds USE_SHA1DC to >> GIT-BUILD-OPTIONS in patch 5/5; I thought GIT-CFLAGS forces >> rebuilding and that was sufficient, but GIT-BUILD-OPTIONS is >> available to tests for introspection, so adding it is needed >> for that reason. > > Yep, exactly. Thanks.
