On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:43:58AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
> > I wonder if we can do this instead
> >
> > if (!omit_values) {
> > - if (show_keys)
> > + if (show_keys && value_)
> > strbuf_addch(buf, key_delim);
> >
> >
Junio C Hamano writes:
> I wonder if we can do this instead
>
> if (!omit_values) {
> - if (show_keys)
> + if (show_keys && value_)
> strbuf_addch(buf, key_delim);
>
> though. That would eliminate the need for rolling back.
No we cannot. "con
Jeff King writes:
> When formatting a config value into a strbuf, we may end
> up stringifying it into a fixed-size buffer using sprintf,
> and then copying that buffer into the strbuf. We can
> eliminate the middle-man (and drop some calls to sprintf!)
> by writing directly to the strbuf.
>
> Th
Quoting Jeff King :
When formatting a config value into a strbuf, we may end
up stringifying it into a fixed-size buffer using sprintf,
and then copying that buffer into the strbuf. We can
eliminate the middle-man (and drop some calls to sprintf!)
by writing directly to the strbuf.
The reason
When formatting a config value into a strbuf, we may end
up stringifying it into a fixed-size buffer using sprintf,
and then copying that buffer into the strbuf. We can
eliminate the middle-man (and drop some calls to sprintf!)
by writing directly to the strbuf.
The reason it was written this way
5 matches
Mail list logo
