Re: [PATCH] list-objects-filter-options: fix function name in BUG

["Martin Ågren" <martin.agren@gmail.com>]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 at 23:54, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>
> I actually wonder if it is time to drop HAVE_VARIADIC_MACROS completely.
> They are in C99, and we have been introducing many other C99-isms. It
> would be a minor cleanup to a few bits of code, which perhaps isn't
> worth the risk. But I also have a vague memory of not being able to
> implement some interfaces because we couldn't count on them.
>
> Poking around, 3689539127 (add helpers for allocating flex-array
> structs, 2016-02-22) points out one such case. I think discussion of
> BUG_ON() got blocked by that, too. Looks like we also discussed them in
> the big "C99 weather balloon" thread:
>
>   https://lore.kernel.org/git/20170710070342.txmlwwq6gvjkwtw7@sigill.intra.peff.net/

Ok, that all makes sense.

> Maybe it's time for something like this as a test:

I had a vague memory that for some weather balloons, we would add a
comment like "please let us know if you trip on this; for your own sake,
don't just patch it locally." But maybe that was just for, e.g.,
01d3a526ad ("t0000: check whether the shell supports the "local"
keyword", 2017-10-26), where we add a test, and a single failing test
might otherwise be easy to ignore.

Which is different to what would happen if every file including
git-compat-util.h and/or each invocation of BUG() would make the
compiler complain.

All in all, this diff makes sense.

Martin