Re: [PATCH 5/9] merge-recursive: avoid returning a wholesale struct

Johannes Schindelin wrote: > P.S.: If it is not too much of a problem, may I ask you to simply delete > remainders of my patches when replying and not commenting on them? I just > deleted 226 lines after verifying that you really did not respond to any > part of it in

Re: [PATCH 5/9] merge-recursive: avoid returning a wholesale struct

Hi Junio, On Wed, 29 Jun 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > It is technically allowed, as per C89, for functions' return type to > > be complete structs (i.e. *not* just pointers to structs), but it is > > bad practice. > > Not

Re: [PATCH 5/9] merge-recursive: avoid returning a wholesale struct

Johannes Schindelin writes: > It is technically allowed, as per C89, for functions' return type to > be complete structs (i.e. *not* just pointers to structs), but it is > bad practice. Not necessarily. > This is a very late attempt to contain the damage done by

[PATCH 5/9] merge-recursive: avoid returning a wholesale struct

It is technically allowed, as per C89, for functions' return type to be complete structs (i.e. *not* just pointers to structs), but it is bad practice. This is a very late attempt to contain the damage done by this developer in 6d297f8 (Status update on merge-recursive in C, 2006-07-08) which