On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 02:25:28PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > Let's flip them to follow the usual write() conventions and > > update all callers. As these are local to config.c, it's > > unlikely that we'd have new callers in any topics in flight > > (which would be silently broken by our change). But just to > > be on the safe side, let's rename them to just > > write_section() and write_pairs(). That also accentuates > > their relationship with write(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King <p...@peff.net> > > The caller only cares if it succeeded, right? Could this return > the customary 0 vs -1 instead of the number of bytes written?
Yes, it could. I went with "follow the conventions of write()" because these are used in a big chain of write() calls (well, really write_in_full). But given the current callers, it does not matter either way. Thanks for reviewing the series, and sorry if my comments have been a bit terse. I'm trying to clear my pile before going out of town for a few days (which I admit may have contributed to my desire for you to prepare patches on top). But either way, don't expect a re-roll until next week at the earliest. -Peff
