On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 11:55:50AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Is the plan for such a "refactor" patch to compose such a series as
> two patch series:
>
> [1/2] automatic refactor
>
> which gives the "semantic patch" in the proposed log message as part
> of its description, and the automated
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "brian m. carlson" writes:
>
>> An example semantic patch looks like this:
>>
>> @@
>> expression E1;
>> @@
>> - is_null_sha1(E1.hash)
>> + is_null_oid(&E1)
>>
>> @@
>> expression E1;
>> @@
>> - is_null_sha1(E1->hash)
>> + is_null_oid(E1)
>
"brian m. carlson" writes:
> An example semantic patch looks like this:
>
> @@
> expression E1;
> @@
> - is_null_sha1(E1.hash)
> + is_null_oid(&E1)
>
> @@
> expression E1;
> @@
> - is_null_sha1(E1->hash)
> + is_null_oid(E1)
>
> This does what you think it does: transforms calls to is_null_sha1 th
On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 1:55 PM, brian m. carlson
wrote:
> One thing that I've noticed with the struct object_id conversion is that
> most of the work is mechanical transformations of a data member from one
> type into another. Doing this by hand is both boring and error-prone,
> and it requires a
One thing that I've noticed with the struct object_id conversion is that
most of the work is mechanical transformations of a data member from one
type into another. Doing this by hand is both boring and error-prone,
and it requires a tiresome review of nearly-identical changes.
I've noticed that
5 matches
Mail list logo