Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> writes: >> This is of course a good change, but we need to assume that no >> further output is made from the remainder of the function for the >> change in the next hunk to remove the existing flush to be correct. > ... > But you made me realize that I cannot simply *move* the flush_output() > call here, in case that code in between will eventually add output.
Yup, that removal of the original one was the only thing I was pointing out. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
