On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 12:01 AM, Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com>
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 8:12 AM, Matthieu Moy
>> <matthieu....@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
>>> Karthik Nayak <karthik....@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> @@ -679,15 +682,20 @@ static int print_ref_list(int kinds, int detached,
>>>> int verbose, int abbrev, stru
>>>> if (verbose)
>>>> maxwidth = calc_maxwidth(&ref_list, strlen(remote_prefix));
>>>>
>>>> - qsort(ref_list.list, ref_list.index, sizeof(struct ref_item),
>>>> ref_cmp);
>>>> + index = ref_list.index;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Print detached HEAD before sorting and printing the rest */
>>>> + if (detached && (ref_list.list[index - 1].kind == REF_DETACHED_HEAD)
>>>> &&
>>>> + !strcmp(ref_list.list[index - 1].name, head)) {
>>>> + print_ref_item(&ref_list.list[index - 1], maxwidth, verbose,
>>>> abbrev,
>>>> + 1, remote_prefix);
>>>> + index -= 1;
>>>> + }
>>>
>>> I think Eric already mentionned it, but I don't remember the conclusion
>>> and can't find it in the archives. Wouldn't it be cleaner to actually
>>> remove the detached head from the array (do "ref_list.index -= 1"
>>> instead of "index -= 1", and possibly free() what needs to be freed?
>>
>> I think Michael Haggerty mentioned something along those lines...
>
> Specifically, I think you're referring to [1] (?).
>
> [1]:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/276363/focus=276676
No not that, that is handled in the previous patch series.
I can't find the reference either, but the comment was along the lines of what
Matthieu just mentioned above, But like I replied on [Patch 6/8] Its
taken care of
in that particular patch. Here it doesn't seem to be needed.
--
Regards,
Karthik Nayak
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
