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-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFF521F93C for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2022 13:17:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="NBsVz0dX"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233869AbiK2NP3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Nov 2022 08:15:29 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50932 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231853AbiK2NPK (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Nov 2022 08:15:10 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-x52b.google.com (mail-pg1-x52b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FD9C61BB7 for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2022 05:14:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg1-x52b.google.com with SMTP id 136so12990987pga.1 for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2022 05:14:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=BslbnE6yAEzzag9fsOITWI/dtw+81RWPMio3i1ul2sY=; b=NBsVz0dX4IIkhZIN1xR41bWgk4Tg/btBfX0w8jMJkvFclAYG79u/5KTuf2ttE6FQ6Q 4+K3h364XBD1/zhlDPldEveC5xzIjuSmTe+7rLdnrB2AgSVKRtdDyF5C0VCM+h7pnxXQ u40hsjDuDPu66BClNg0Ndkat6ALg0WaJRwIhpkqZQnmATjQwtoXU4O8FYNNC8Nl6cyMz +FpasZzE++j6R48wKGhFm2WLnz4/2W10uBo3XJg7547ucQjFSbPlhRbM96VlheCnV73/ oh0d6buDoGVWxU1lmDlHB5Ouc81QbP4I3FEwkYDQPgIKSUsTBYCP8Ojff5vhSRo3+6uA Nl+g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=BslbnE6yAEzzag9fsOITWI/dtw+81RWPMio3i1ul2sY=; b=soAxJ4k8NLJayj9s5xmhDhi6D/CPTlyMM2UY55dQtsZF2T3CNkGMHkHXsRbeqTf98z wDp42LTLGe2jJMR7INqB2JmfFtGkiY+ULfYXwR92scyW3uPO2jjI1pre2o1KN/UooeXo bXa3QCjf3Cb+tfvVt+RORLaOngb52+0Y+J2RKUJTVmaX0TrUBK2Qr/V0xylbCBlKwJPj MBlD4p9oMggNyts3+scNRRbN7QlMRRRzKpuqlEOs12ppTpVeRftQlO5GS8JuAyosnn3U KcqwNU7ikwrH15GfVPsFSe8/uipmeT50pFMq918i0x6b2dkeGtTix3Kuckq5CVHU/Jrm mGQg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pmc9AFzyXP1+N2rkkrXFL1icSBGXf26ue0cDEDx2KkfR0Qj98Go QYDSX1XWhd+8fK2B+GOiU/I= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf64aaOUdJIFQX0wYkwTEQvqhT2AmBiFo9nPk6IJARxICBk3Yvmpch3Tl8Xj6bczk2EBpmxsBQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:1817:0:b0:477:fd2e:370d with SMTP id y23-20020a631817000000b00477fd2e370dmr13521915pgl.121.1669727669128; Tue, 29 Nov 2022 05:14:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([47.246.101.61]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y9-20020a17090a134900b00218ae9916c4sm1317680pjf.35.2022.11.29.05.14.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Nov 2022 05:14:28 -0800 (PST) From: Teng Long X-Google-Original-From: Teng Long To: peff@peff.net Cc: avarab@gmail.com, derrickstolee@github.com, dyroneteng@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, me@ttaylorr.com, tenglong.tl@alibaba-inc.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] pack-bitmap.c: trace bitmap ignore logs when midx-bitmap is found Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 21:14:22 +0800 Message-Id: <20221129131422.82642-1-tenglong.tl@alibaba-inc.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.38.1.385.g28306b7e8d5 In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > > I agree it's not hurting here, it's OK for me to make the improvement > > here. But I have a question, do we prefer to omit the initialization > > in such scenarios if we make sure it will initialized correctly？ > > I don't know that we have a particular rule here, but I would say that > yes, if you know the initialization isn't used, then skip it. That > communicates the expectation to anybody reading the code. And if you're > wrong, the compiler will generally notice. Thanks for the explanation!