At least the older humongous pretty_print_commit() got separated
into manageable chunks, and I was happy. I was just too lazy
when refactoring the code and stopped there.
The right fix is to propagate the "realloc as needed" callchain
into add_user_info(), instead of having "this should be enough"
there. These two you touched are the only two callsite of that
static function.
Hi,
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
At least the older humongous pretty_print_commit() got separated into
manageable chunks, and I was happy. I was just too lazy when
refactoring the code and stopped there.
That's perfectly okay. This is why you parked it in 'next', I guess.
The right fix is to propagate the "realloc as needed" callchain into
add_user_info(), instead of having "this should be enough" there.
These two you touched are the only two callsite of that static function.
Right. As I said, I was in a hurry, and could not research it properly.
Besides, now that you gave me the proper pointer, I can take care about it
tomorrow, unless somebody else is faster.
Ciao,
Dscho
Hi,
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
At least the older humongous pretty_print_commit() got separated into
manageable chunks, and I was happy. I was just too lazy when
refactoring the code and stopped there.
Understandable.
The right fix is to propagate the "realloc as needed" callchain into
add_user_info(), instead of having "this should be enough" there.
These two you touched are the only two callsite of that static function.
I had a go at this, but unfortunately I do not understand enough of what
is going on there. For example, add_rfc2047() sometimes quotes some text.
I have no idea what a conservative estimate of the growth is, so I cannot
continue there.
Sorry,
Dscho