Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com> writes: > Following a discussion on the mailing list:
If a reader of this commit message could profit from reading the discussion, refer to it by URL and/or Message-Id. If not, don't mention it. > while it may be convenient > to accept NULL value in qobject_unref() (for similar reasons as free() > accepts NULL), it is a probably a bad idea to accept NULL argument in > qobject_ref(). Yes? What's the patch doing about it? Peeking ahead: it outlaws it. So say that. > Furthermore, Commit message smell: two things in one patch. Worth separating them? > it is convenient and more clear to call qobject_ref() at > the time when the reference is associated with a variable, or > argument. For this reason, make qobject_ref() return the same pointer > as given. Not 100% clear whether the patch merely makes the "convenient and more clear" way possible, or reality. Peeking ahead: it's the latter. So say that. How did you find the places to change? Do you think you got them all? > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com>
