Re: [WIP/PATCH v5 02/10] for-each-ref: clean up code

Karthik Nayak [off-list ref] writes:

In 'grab_single_ref()' remove the extra count variable 'cnt' and
use the variable 'grab_cnt' of structure 'grab_ref_cbdata' directly
instead.

Change comment in 'struct ref_sort' to reflect changes in code.

I don't see how the comment change is related to the code change:

Did you squash the comment change into the wrong commit?

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/

On 06/08/2015 08:07 PM, Matthieu Moy wrote:

Karthik Nayak [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

In 'grab_single_ref()' remove the extra count variable 'cnt' and
use the variable 'grab_cnt' of structure 'grab_ref_cbdata' directly
instead.

Change comment in 'struct ref_sort' to reflect changes in code.

I don't see how the comment change is related to the code change:

quoted

  struct ref_sort {
  	struct ref_sort *next;
-	int atom; /* index into used_atom array */
+	int atom; /* index into 'struct atom_value *' array */
  	unsigned reverse : 1;
  };

@@ -881,7 +881,6 @@ static int grab_single_ref(const char *refname, const unsigned char *sha1, int f
  {
  	struct grab_ref_cbdata *cb = cb_data;
  	struct refinfo *ref;
-	int cnt;

  	if (flag & REF_BAD_NAME) {
  		  warning("ignoring ref with broken name %s", refname);

@@ -898,10 +897,8 @@ static int grab_single_ref(const char *refname, const unsigned char *sha1, int f
  	 */
  	ref = new_refinfo(refname, sha1, flag);

-	cnt = cb->grab_cnt;
-	REALLOC_ARRAY(cb->grab_array, cnt + 1);
-	cb->grab_array[cnt++] = ref;
-	cb->grab_cnt = cnt;
+	REALLOC_ARRAY(cb->grab_array, cb->grab_cnt + 1);
+	cb->grab_array[cb->grab_cnt++] = ref;
  	return 0;
  }

Did you squash the comment change into the wrong commit?

What I meant was, change the comment to reflect changes in code since 
the comment was made, not relevant to the simplification of code.

I put these two together as they are trivial changes.
Either I could reword the commit message or split the commit.

-- 
Regards,
Karthik