On 03/11, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > > > Thomas Gummerer <t.gumme...@gmail.com> writes: > > > >> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] stash: pass pathspec as pointer > >> > >> Passing the pathspec by value is potentially confusing, as the copy is > >> only a shallow copy, so save the overhead of the copy, and pass the > >> pathspec struct as a pointer. > >> > >> In addition use copy_pathspec to copy the pathspec into > >> rev.prune_data, so the copy is a proper deep copy, and owned by the > >> revision API, as that's what the API expects. > > > > It does make quite a lot of sense, but do we need clear_pathspec() > > at strategic places after we are done using these copied instances? > > Another thing is that this also needs Dscho's fix to pass down the > pathspec that was originally given, not the parsed part.
Good catch on both acconts. I'll send a new patch soon, adding the clear_pathspec() calls and rebasing it on top of Dscho's fix.
