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=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no 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 128351F404 for ; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 13:52:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751241AbeC3NwN (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Mar 2018 09:52:13 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f196.google.com ([209.85.128.196]:40700 "EHLO mail-wr0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750794AbeC3NwM (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Mar 2018 09:52:12 -0400 Received: by mail-wr0-f196.google.com with SMTP id n2so4787688wrj.7 for ; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 06:52:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=2e457XKvpaG5Xq82ApBDnFeexB1Oga1MewpSuQInmH4=; b=s1WWdqU1Uve0GD9tGuxiF2bs33TE+Hrmq63Vu0AYlCt89IqL3yABATOdJe3qfv66Or DANpG8cZQOX7AI2Qlmcu7h0PjyOPMEZxEQChx7WCgkrJHyBG2nHl7I47FgNhzSBbgXwJ DxCDK04j5o+p+WMYmnI0NojDl8phJVEIpjOD8QamQXAowX5lJlj6gWu7CZEPm3K1IQCp dqf4zry1ebw3ndcBBhsBEUubz9tgOo7T3Yx8KelIOtvk8Rj7TPmfCJW4ihMl2cIhGaWc OcVGhFQjs1VQNSKG8GitptOx2c1qCrerfYRgncPuXmtMzjRaU94YOHjmHyVh51HyQgYq gEig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=2e457XKvpaG5Xq82ApBDnFeexB1Oga1MewpSuQInmH4=; b=V9oGdnG3oJaE6tn40Bqsn7vUcH3hUQbdBoYqgSaqB+mX0shNrIEsFKNUI2EDsEG+vn bp/kkW7SJUroUNx5kPHedU3P7oOYBvfNybnuDT1mjOc2ZFFPz+LDe9gLfq39RQrRW7E4 cPStxXOV4BVCQe5nnUTYaNLKKomiQy7kdHhv739UY7TbXvpLzzB48Exe9KzEB8HwHas4 afBXybBOPoeiC+qMYs+NYT2n2wGyzn/JQadeYvX88acpc0/XLbltMdjKKCDQwqfw2/WP 2ixVXkNor5QEis9+QFEwWeivH13fSydoKAEIFJbaHD7wYmlxXI3C9A3XP3QUw6m7DJKi 4tIw== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7FZYDQCCuRdcI9ADFvBELBGDn6cEahREKK4eyJirjdnnoPNfQnU DFOlF7+AiOVDr4fMxGbEXKk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4/pO4yqIRhQcqCjcc0AGqesRGI/PrsPuCVCCI8aAQtPqtIMV08xWrmYqkvN56dhoMh1FcEAhw== X-Received: by 10.223.210.12 with SMTP id g12mr9380080wri.131.1522417930881; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 06:52:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (cpc73832-dals21-2-0-cust969.20-2.cable.virginm.net. [81.110.231.202]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u44sm12543341wrb.67.2018.03.30.06.52.09 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 30 Mar 2018 06:52:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2018 14:55:37 +0100 From: Thomas Gummerer To: Eric Sunshine Cc: Git List , =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy , Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/6] worktree: remove force_new_branch from struct add_opts Message-ID: <20180330135537.GB2629@hank> References: <20180317222219.4940-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com> <20180325134947.25828-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com> <20180325134947.25828-4-t.gummerer@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1-rc1 (2014-03-12) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 03/27, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > > The 'force_new_branch' flag in 'struct add_opts' is only used inside the > > add function, where we already have the same information stored in the > > 'new_branch_force' variable. Avoid that unnecessary duplication. > > When I was reviewing your original dwim-ery series (inferring 'foo' > from 'origin/foo'), I noticed that 'struct add_opts' had accumulated a > number of unnecessary members over time, including this one. My plan > was to submit a patch removing all those pointless members after your > dwim-ery series settled, however, I never got around to it. Ah right, I didn't look at them in detail, so I failed to notice that. While I'm already in the area I may as well do that, thanks for the suggestion! > This patch might be a good opportunity for doing that cleanup > wholesale, removing all unneeded members rather than just the one. (If > so, you'd probably want to move to this patch to the front of the > series as cleanup before the meatier changes.) Anyhow, it's just a > thought; feel free to respond with "it's outside the scope of this > series" if you're not interested in doing it. > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gummerer