Re: [PATCH 05/22] sequencer: allow the sequencer to take custody of malloc()ed data

Hi Junio, On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jakub Narębski writes: > > > In my personal opinion 'set_me_free_after_use' is not the best name, > > but I unfortunately do not have a better proposal. Maybe 'entrust_ptr', > > or 'entrusted_data' / 'entrusted_ptr' /

Re: [PATCH 05/22] sequencer: allow the sequencer to take custody of malloc()ed data

Jakub Narębski writes: > In my personal opinion 'set_me_free_after_use' is not the best name, > but I unfortunately do not have a better proposal. Maybe 'entrust_ptr', > or 'entrusted_data' / 'entrusted_ptr' / 'entrusted'? Is this to accumulate to-be-freed pointers? I think

Re: [PATCH 05/22] sequencer: allow the sequencer to take custody of malloc()ed data

Hello Johannes, W dniu 30.08.2016 o 09:29, Johannes Schindelin pisze: > On Mon, 29 Aug 2016, Jakub Narębski wrote: >> W dniu 29.08.2016 o 10:04, Johannes Schindelin pisze: >>> +void *sequencer_entrust(struct replay_opts *opts, void >>> *set_me_free_after_use) >>> +{ >>> +

Re: [PATCH 05/22] sequencer: allow the sequencer to take custody of malloc()ed data

Hi Hannes, On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, Johannes Sixt wrote: > Am 29.08.2016 um 23:59 schrieb Jakub Narębski: > > W dniu 29.08.2016 o 10:04, Johannes Schindelin pisze: > > > -#define REPLAY_OPTS_INIT { -1, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, NULL, > > > NULL, NULL, 0, 0, NULL } > > > +#define

Re: [PATCH 05/22] sequencer: allow the sequencer to take custody of malloc()ed data

Am 29.08.2016 um 23:59 schrieb Jakub Narębski: W dniu 29.08.2016 o 10:04, Johannes Schindelin pisze: -#define REPLAY_OPTS_INIT { -1, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, NULL, NULL, NULL, 0, 0, NULL } +#define REPLAY_OPTS_INIT { -1, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, NULL, NULL, NULL, 0, 0, NULL,

Re: [PATCH 05/22] sequencer: allow the sequencer to take custody of malloc()ed data

W dniu 29.08.2016 o 10:04, Johannes Schindelin pisze: > The sequencer is our attempt to lib-ify cherry-pick. Yet it behaves > like a one-shot command when it reads its configuration: memory is > allocated and released only when the command exits. > > This is kind of okay for git-cherry-pick,

[PATCH 05/22] sequencer: allow the sequencer to take custody of malloc()ed data

The sequencer is our attempt to lib-ify cherry-pick. Yet it behaves like a one-shot command when it reads its configuration: memory is allocated and released only when the command exits. This is kind of okay for git-cherry-pick, which *is* a one-shot command. All the work to make the sequencer