On 05/29/2013 06:53 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes:
[...]
+current_bad_sha1 = xmalloc(20);
+hashcpy(current_bad_sha1, sha1);
This, together with 18/25, may hint that we want hashdup()?
I thought about it, but was surprised
From: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:51 PM
On 05/29/2013 06:53 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes:
[...]
+ current_bad_sha1 = xmalloc(20);
+ hashcpy(current_bad_sha1, sha1);
This, together with 18/25, may hint that we
The lifetime of the sha1 parameter passed to an each_ref_fn callback
is not guaranteed, so make a copy for later use.
Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu
---
bisect.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/bisect.c b/bisect.c
index
3 matches
Mail list logo