[PATCH] sequencer: trivial cleanup

Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <redacted>
---
 sequencer.c | 5 +----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index 351548f..8ed9f98 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c

@@ -466,10 +466,7 @@ static int allow_empty(struct replay_opts *opts, struct commit *commit)
 	empty_commit = is_original_commit_empty(commit);
 	if (empty_commit < 0)
 		return empty_commit;
-	if (!empty_commit)
-		return 0;
-	else
-		return 1;
+	return empty_commit ? 0 : 1;
 }
 
 static int do_pick_commit(struct commit *commit, struct replay_opts *opts)

-- 
1.8.4.100.gde18f6d.dirty

On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra [off-list ref] wrote:

Isn't it the other way around? Moreover, 'return !!empty_commit;'
would be simpler.

-- 
Felipe Contreras

Felipe Contreras wrote:

quoted

 sequencer.c | 5 +----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index 351548f..8ed9f98 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c

@@ -466,10 +466,7 @@ static int allow_empty(struct replay_opts *opts, struct commit *commit)
        empty_commit = is_original_commit_empty(commit);
        if (empty_commit < 0)
                return empty_commit;
-       if (!empty_commit)
-               return 0;
-       else
-               return 1;
+       return empty_commit ? 0 : 1;
 }

Isn't it the other way around? Moreover, 'return !!empty_commit;'
would be simpler.

Yeah, thanks for pointing out this grave stupidity. This seems to be
inconsequential as far as the tests are concerned: have to do some
major yak shaving.

Hi,

On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 05:53:19PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:

On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <redacted>
---
 sequencer.c | 5 +----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index 351548f..8ed9f98 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c

@@ -466,10 +466,7 @@ static int allow_empty(struct replay_opts *opts, struct commit *commit)
        empty_commit = is_original_commit_empty(commit);
        if (empty_commit < 0)
                return empty_commit;
-       if (!empty_commit)
-               return 0;
-       else
-               return 1;
+       return empty_commit ? 0 : 1;
 }

Isn't it the other way around? Moreover, 'return !!empty_commit;'
would be simpler.

Considering the possible return values from
is_original_commit_empty(), I think all this could be written as

  return is_original_commit_empty(commit);


Best,
Gábor