On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 04:07:00PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
-if (!memcmp(used_atom[at], color:, 6))
+if (starts_with(used_atom[at], color:))
need_color_reset_at_eol =
!!strcmp(used_atom[at], color_reset);
[...]
What if
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Quint Guvernator
quintus.pub...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-03-17 21:59 GMT-04:00 Eric Sunshine sunsh...@sunshineco.com:
I can't speak for Junio, but the description could be made more
concise and to-the-point. Aside from using imperative voice, you can
eliminate
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 05:09:45PM -0700, Shawn Pearce wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Duy Nguyen pclo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 11:45 PM, Shawn Pearce spea...@spearce.org wrote:
You missed the SSH case. It doesn't have this slot to hide the data into.
Right
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 08:23:08AM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
The default would start at false, and people who know their server is
very up-to-date can turn it on. And then when many server
implementations support it, flip the default to auto. And either leave
it there forever, or
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Jacopo Notarstefano
jacopo.notarstef...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems to me that the topic of adding the checkpatch.pl script to
Git's source tree has cropped up several times in the past, as
recently as a couple of days ago: $gmane/243607.
It should be noted that
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 06:30:49PM -, Philip Oakley wrote:
* jk/branch-at-publish-rebased (2014-01-17) 5 commits
- t1507 (rev-parse-upstream): fix typo in test title
- implement @{publish} shorthand
- branch_get: provide per-branch pushremote pointers
- branch_get: return early on error
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 08:35:04PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
As explained in the previous commit, current aggressive settings
--depth=250 --window=250 could slow down repository access
significantly. Notice that people usually work on recent history only,
we could keep recent history
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote:
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 08:35:04PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
As explained in the previous commit, current aggressive settings
--depth=250 --window=250 could slow down repository access
significantly. Notice that people
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:50:50AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 08:35:04PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
As explained in the previous commit, current aggressive settings
--depth=250 --window=250 could slow down repository access
significantly. Notice that people
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:00:48PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote:
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 08:35:04PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
As explained in the previous commit, current aggressive settings
--depth=250 --window=250
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote:
[before]
real0m28.824s
user0m28.620s
sys 0m0.232s
[after]
real0m21.694s
user0m21.544s
sys 0m0.172s
The numbers below are completely pulled out of a hat, so we can perhaps
do even
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 07:56:46AM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote:
Consider this code:
void above()
{}
static int Y;
static int A;
int bar()
{
return X;
}
void below()
{}
Thanks, this example is very helpful.
When you 'git grep --function-context X', then you get
101 - 112 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
