On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 10:58:19AM -0700, Elijah Newren wrote: > > In most cases I've been trying to determine the "bug versus cruft" thing > > myself, but I fear that merge-recursive exceeds my abilities here. ;) > > These ones all look like cruft to me. I dug through them and tried > looking through history and old submissions for my guesses and how > they ended up here; details below.
Good, that makes things easier. :) > > static int handle_rename_via_dir(struct merge_options *o, > > struct diff_filepair *pair, > > - const char *rename_branch, > > - const char *other_branch) > > + const char *rename_branch) > > Given the similarity in function signature to handle_rename_delete(), > it's possible I copied the function and then started editing. Whether > I was lazily doing that, or if I really added that parameter because I > thought I was going to add an informational message to the user that > used it, or something else, I don't know. But I agree, it's just not > needed and could be added back later if someone did find a use for it. Yeah, this was the one I was most worried about. Thanks for confirming. I'm preparing a bunch of similar cleanups, so I'll roll this into that series. -Peff
