Re: [PATCH v6 01/10] ref-filter: introduce 'ref_formatting_state'

Eric Sunshine [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

@@ -1254,9 +1273,26 @@ static void emit(const char *cp, const char *ep)
+static void reset_formatting_state(struct ref_formatting_state *state)
+{
+       int quote_style = state->quote_style;
+       memset(state, 0, sizeof(*state));
+       state->quote_style = quote_style;

I wonder if this sledge-hammer approach of saving one or two values
before clearing the entire 'ref_formatting_state' and then restoring
the saved values will scale well. Would it be better for this to just
individually reset the fields which need resetting and not touch those
that don't?

I'm the one who suggested these 3 lines. I wrote them this way with the
assumption that there would only be 1 field to keep, and thet the rest
of the series was going to add more fields to reset (currently true I
think), to avoid the risk of forgetting one value to reset.

I'm fine with the other way around too.

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