On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 10:27 PM, Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
This is the culmination of the last few commits. Since some callers
want to store refnames in the name field of object_array elements, but
we don't want those callers to assume that the refnames that they got
from
On 05/20/2013 12:33 PM, Johan Herland wrote:
On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 10:27 PM, Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu
wrote:
This is the culmination of the last few commits. Since some callers
want to store refnames in the name field of object_array elements, but
we don't want those callers
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 04:42:38PM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
* Many callers store the empty string () as the name; for example,
most of the entries created during a run of rev-list have as
their name. This means that lots of needless copies of are being
made. I think that
On 05/20/2013 06:44 PM, Jeff King wrote:
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 04:42:38PM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
* Many callers store the empty string () as the name; for example,
most of the entries created during a run of rev-list have as
their name. This means that lots of needless copies
Change object_array and object_array_entry to copy the name before
storing it in the name field, and free it when an entry is deleted
from the array. This is useful because some of the name strings
passed to add_object_array() or add_object_array_with_mode() are
refnames whose lifetime is not
5 matches
Mail list logo
