From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C96BE20281 for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 15:47:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751059AbdIWPrG (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Sep 2017 11:47:06 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:48112 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750913AbdIWPrF (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Sep 2017 11:47:05 -0400 Received: (qmail 19106 invoked by uid 109); 23 Sep 2017 15:47:04 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 15:47:04 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 13053 invoked by uid 111); 23 Sep 2017 15:47:42 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 11:47:42 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 23 Sep 2017 11:47:02 -0400 Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 11:47:02 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Martin =?utf-8?B?w4VncmVu?= Cc: Git Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] object_array: add and use `object_array_pop()` Message-ID: <20170923154702.ltyg6ctqlcup6ars@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20170920200229.bc4yniz6otng2zyz@sigill.intra.peff.net> <80eaae517f73f57137db6adfcaef2e8ce16576c1.1506120292.git.martin.agren@gmail.com> <20170923042757.ozl4qnmrsnd64mfc@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 11:49:16AM +0200, Martin Ågren wrote: > >> void add_object_array_with_path(struct object *obj, const char *name, struct object_array *array, unsigned mode, const char *path); > >> +/* > >> + * Returns NULL if the array is empty. Otherwise, returns the last object > >> + * after removing its entry from the array. Other resources associated > >> + * with that object are left in an unspecified state and should not be > >> + * examined. > >> + */ > >> +struct object *object_array_pop(struct object_array *array); > > > > I'm very happy to see a comment over the declaration here. But I think > > it's a bit more readable if we put a blank line between the prior > > function and the start of that comment. > > Yes, that looks strange. :( I could re-roll and/or ask Junio to fiddle > with it. On closer look, this file is pretty close to documenting all > functions and there are some other comment-formatting issues. So here's > a promise that I'll get back to clean this up more generally in the not > too distant future. Would that be an acceptable punt? :-? Yeah, I don't think it is a show-stopper (and I think there is a reasonable chance Junio will just mark it up as he applies). -Peff