On 7 October 2017 at 00:48, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a follow-up of Marc-André's clang-tidy series [1].
> While chatting we realized we were trying to reach the same goal, Marc-André
> using clang-tidy and me using spatch; so he let me finish his series applying
> my changes
Hi,
This series seems to have some coding style problems. See output below for
more information:
Type: series
Message-id: 20171006235023.11952-1-f4...@amsat.org
Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/88] use g_new() family of functions
=== TEST SCRIPT BEGIN ===
#!/bin/bash
BASE=base
n=1
total=$(git
... and I obviously forgot to paste this...
(useful for Marc-André mostly)
[] : patches are identical
[] : number of functional differences between upstream/downstream patch
[down] : patch is downstream-only
The flags [FC] indicate (F)unctional and (C)ontextual differences,
respectively
00
Hi,
This is a follow-up of Marc-André's clang-tidy series [1].
While chatting we realized we were trying to reach the same goal, Marc-André
using clang-tidy and me using spatch; so he let me finish his series applying
my changes over his.
I also included Jan's patch which fits well.
Summary:
- 1
