On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 09:46:22AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> >> Maybe you could introduce "test_seq" instead.
> >
> > I don't have a strong preference, as there are only two callsites. Do
> > you want to make a patch?
> If you run "for . in . . ." in t/, we see quite a many hits, so
> "only two callsites" might be undercounting the candidates.

True. Although a good number of them are not numeric sequences (however
perl being perl, I think my one-liner would take "a" and "g" as
end-points just as readily).

I have no problem with converting them all. I just didn't want to
personally go to the work myself.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to