On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 10:04 PM Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Matheus Tavares <[email protected]> writes:
> > @@ -598,7 +599,8 @@ static int grep_tree(struct grep_opt *opt, const struct
> > pathspec *pathspec,
> > free(data);
> > } else if (recurse_submodules && S_ISGITLINK(entry.mode)) {
> > hit |= grep_submodule(opt, pathspec, &entry.oid,
> > - base->buf, base->buf + tn_len);
> > + base->buf, base->buf + tn_len,
> > + 1); /* ignored */
>
> The trailing comment is misleading. In the context of reviewing
> this patch, we can probably tell it applies only to that "1", but
> if you read only the postimage, the "ignored" comment looks as if
> the call itself is somehow ignored by somebody unspecified. It is
> not clear at all that it is only about the final parameter.
>
> If you must...
>
> hit |= grep_submodule(opt, pathspec, &entry.oid,
> base->buf, base->buf + tn_len,
> 1 /* ignored */);
Yeah, I suggested adding an "/* ignored */" comment, but I was indeed
thinking about something like this.
> ... is a reasonable way to write it.
