Jeff King <> writes:

> Before, if (!one && !two) we would call contains(two, ...), and now we
> will simply assume it is zero. Which I think is an improvement, as we
> would have segfaulted before. I don't think it is a bug in the current
> code (we would not ever feed the function two NULLs), but it is nice to
> be more defensive.
> Acked-by: Jeff King <>

Thanks, both.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to