Re: [PATCH 05/20] check_object(): convert to new revindex API

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 11:15:49AM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote:

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 06:43:23AM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote:

quoted

quoted

@@ -1813,11 +1813,11 @@ static void check_object(struct object_entry *entry, uint32_t object_index)
 				goto give_up;
 			}
 			if (reuse_delta && !entry->preferred_base) {
-				struct revindex_entry *revidx;
-				revidx = find_pack_revindex(p, ofs);
-				if (!revidx)
+				uint32_t pos;
+				if (offset_to_pack_pos(p, ofs, &pos) < 0)

The current implementation does not return a positive value. Only
-1 on error and 0 on success. Is this "< 0" doing anything important?
Seems like it would be easiest to do

	if (offset_to_pack_pos(p, ofs, &pos))

[snip]

Either would work, of course. I tend to find the '< 0' form easier to
read, but I may be in the minority there. For me, the negative return
value makes clear that the function encountered an error.

I'll throw in my opinion that "< 0" to me much more clearly signals "did
an error occur". And that same form can be used consistently with
functions which _do_ have a positive return value on success, too. So I
prefer it for readability.

-Peff