Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> writes: > Matthieu Moy <[email protected]> writes: > >> Jeff King <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> --- a/send-pack.c >>> +++ b/send-pack.c >>> @@ -36,18 +36,15 @@ int option_parse_push_signed(const struct option *opt, >>> die("bad %s argument: %s", opt->long_name, arg); >>> } >>> >>> -static int feed_object(const unsigned char *sha1, int fd, int negative) >>> +static void feed_object(const unsigned char *sha1, FILE *fh, int negative) >>> { >>> - char buf[42]; >>> - >>> if (negative && !has_sha1_file(sha1)) >>> - return 1; >>> + return; >> [...] >>> @@ -97,21 +95,22 @@ static int pack_objects(int fd, struct ref *refs, >>> struct sha1_array *extra, stru >> [...] >>> for (i = 0; i < extra->nr; i++) >>> - if (!feed_object(extra->sha1[i], po.in, 1)) >>> - break; >>> + feed_object(extra->sha1[i], po_in, 1); >> >> I may have missed the obvious, but doesn't this change the behavior when >> "negative && !has_sha1_file(sha1)" happens? I understand that you don't >> need write_or_whine anymore, but don't understand how you get rid of the >> "return 1" here. > > The original feed_object() has somewhat strange interface in that a > non-zero return from it is "Everything went alright!", and zero > means "Oops, something went wrong".
Indeed, this is the "obvious" I've missed. So, indeed, the new "return" does the same thing as the old "return 1". -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
