From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61DAF1F66F for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 01:03:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730790AbgKJBDt (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Nov 2020 20:03:49 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:52318 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729661AbgKJBDs (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Nov 2020 20:03:48 -0500 Received: (qmail 5340 invoked by uid 109); 10 Nov 2020 01:03:47 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 01:03:47 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 29656 invoked by uid 111); 10 Nov 2020 01:03:46 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 20:03:46 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 20:03:46 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Elijah Newren Cc: Junio C Hamano , Git Mailing List Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Nov 2020, #02; Mon, 9) Message-ID: <20201110010346.GA1269097@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 04:44:17PM -0800, Elijah Newren wrote: > > * en/strmap (2020-11-06) 15 commits > [...] > > Will merge to 'next'? > > Yes, please. Peff went over the series in detail and said it looked > good to him as of v4 (he also seemed fine with the extra change in v5 > that I made in response to your request). I'm not aware of any issues > or further requests, and believe it is done. I'll CC Peff just in > case he wants to change his mind and request any more changes here... I actually forgot to look over your strset_add() function carefully, so thanks for the reminder. :) It all looks good to me. Obviously the boolean return is flipped from my strset_check_and_add(), but I can't really think of a reason to prefer one over the other. -Peff