Am 02.06.2013 19:25, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 10:46 AM, René Scharfe
<rene.scha...@lsrfire.ath.cx> wrote:
+               for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
+                       struct cache_entry *ce = src[i + o->merge];
+                       if (ce != o->df_conflict_entry)


It's possible that ce is NULL, but you didn't add that check because
free(NULL) still works? Or because ce cannot be NULL?

If it's the former, I think it's clearer if we check that ce is not
NULL either way.

It is NULL if one tree misses an entry (e.g. a new or removed file). free handles NULL and we generally avoid duplicating its NULL-check.

You're probably referring to the non-merge case as the example for checking. That one is different, though, because there we call do_add_entry instead of free, which does not handle NULL. And it doesn't have to, as it is mostly called through add_entry, which never passes NULL.

René

--
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