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,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 341AA1F8C2 for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2021 18:20:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229752AbhBGSUO (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Feb 2021 13:20:14 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:57135 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229729AbhBGSUL (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Feb 2021 13:20:11 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7DF8119D1B; Sun, 7 Feb 2021 13:19:29 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=ONiNgIwcr0HUzncjHIME6leypqU=; b=SHFL1f J6Bhy7YZ9iR3a9qimnaB5EV1E8T1Hjx0FrIJF9rneLu7/FvMXZQslWKde+CzPIDB r//Jj7h6kbso3pDj9VIdc37zyF4N78Pu3ND2ATig2BEUe+68u90L/OIo+mMN4Hbr dlEMKsqzVVm/5NJnjwEf2h02xIMlTq0ORDdls= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=iv6uuT6qBzNtDUcVjkKQA0Wa5LgsVQaF /l1YgBrdO3hN3A2DMqexEmls6a5pIXNMYrgbgCbV9PGh7x825r1Y9QnM3YvIkpRZ jGHS8aEMwWX0FilbB4CqxfPAcHKPHNgNC8Bf7F6A5m47V25/X4Hy1T1WOjv7ElFB HBkERluXhig= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D07C3119D1A; Sun, 7 Feb 2021 13:19:29 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.243.138.161]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2383D119D19; Sun, 7 Feb 2021 13:19:27 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Hariom verma Cc: Hariom Verma via GitGitGadget , git , Christian Couder , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] ref-filter: use pretty.c logic for trailers References: <47d89f872314cad6dc6010ff3c8ade43a70bc540.1612602945.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2021 10:19:25 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Hariom verma's message of "Sun, 7 Feb 2021 17:36:45 +0530") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 033F3DB8-6971-11EB-A1F7-D609E328BF65-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hariom verma writes: > So this isn't about the patch series. Question still remains the same. Thanks for digging the history. > Why extra blank line? > Let's dig a bit. > Ah. I guess I found the reason. It's due to `putchar('\n');` in > `show_ref_array_item() [1]`. It puts a new line after each ref item. > > Do you want me to include a patch to get rid of this "extra blank > line" for trailers in "for-each-ref"? I do not know the answer to the last question, because we haven't learned the original reason why we decided to add the extra blank line after the trailer output. Even though I find it unnecessary, the code that adds it must have been written with a good reason to do so, and I do not want to see us remove the "\n" without knowing that reason. Thanks.