From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 729E1C388F9 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 19:08:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 043E320BED for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 19:08:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="vYwiMvYe" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754054AbgJWTIN (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2020 15:08:13 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45038 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754051AbgJWTIN (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2020 15:08:13 -0400 Received: from mail-il1-x141.google.com (mail-il1-x141.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::141]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD4FDC0613CE for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:08:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x141.google.com with SMTP id k1so2416404ilc.10 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:08:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=KXROMgmiKAQ1fWKE8VmWiW43nUMXZOjtxuojNckgg2k=; b=vYwiMvYe91Xz+I7Wi2HK0rKS6yW4WIP4Hif9WQC+4VuY3lUxTAN6b2Iw/wHxQvwtlm RZLj/d1H6kaKx9L1OW3URuNAkRz4TjDRzCSexNLRUdFWf9PVv2BUyzbXaNqVzPrCJgzw aRDelCZFN4NvVFNncS1aUnyBw+6hMx5GppnbpgAqF6nWcUILyuq0kRuzseZEGxgIherU h3q638uL5OubmD3fhz1jZAOM5AF66E/nxhj7IiCbAyaul1EIh4pg5ML3nbOTYWRTZwib j8IA4HCFCEoOHZNZvVHNySHG5cWE+uSdAR3SOh8tK4dFWTnuV3LLp5TGYG05IR9mbLzc dQdA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KXROMgmiKAQ1fWKE8VmWiW43nUMXZOjtxuojNckgg2k=; b=Mum097rswpYZkxqC/4/DhxsbHAoP7PZw0qdqNyKayXO71IK3wskSkuBk173PRzVg7O VFbKmxR+TPTRN+Rd4FhrkkiTu5OfF/U+WWiWzSRKYdDYLsYYsux+DeBLqpSXlJke9sVl jPo+ykGh8CG3JYH5RH5jr8/P+1VdVhwCu8wWd+9ClSc6WSys8DY7jVJfzT0POZ3IrWfq a8ZuOCgeRu2QGsX1O3SV+s4Y30dPz395lYLKUjSc6Axxk7wNT0PU1AmvobJpyp2v+pTd K2IaLQ6Pk8deuNMyTtCk7sKU++trXH+4dQPxvdyixySfpVGyO8WZ43Sn4aP6MJDY/Y17 vsfA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Ix8/x4vqyVWxvGrhd+bw8t8EZ3WSpRGw7g9zNwuEYwlnRaBuQ RAvjkJw03NK4QP3qHjS1Ry+e4gV67l40Lcn4n0s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwhDGjwJXctTU9J0eIeI7EjVlA5l31ch2f71r6raNApXhFRQkhBCj3pT/eI7udeju0Vy5Bl8e6B4GXtKQxv9wQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:11af:: with SMTP id 15mr2681769ilj.5.1603480092256; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:08:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201022112201.51459-1-sangunb09@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Sangeeta NB Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 00:38:01 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Outreachy] [PATCH v3] diff: do not show submodule with untracked files as "-dirty" To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Git List , Phillip Wood , Kaartic Sivaraam , Eric Sunshine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 12:25 AM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Sangeeta NB writes: > > >> I found this change a "noise": > > > > Oh okay, Again sorry for the misunderstanding. > > > >> > >> strvec_pushl(&cp.args, "status", "--porcelain=2", NULL); > >> if (ignore_untracked) > >> - strvec_push(&cp.args, "-uno"); > >> + strvec_push (&cp.args, "-uno"); > >> > >> If it were going the other direction, "we fix coding style violation > >> while at it" may be a good justification to do so, but this > >> particular change (1) is not neeeded for the purpose of this patch, > >> and (2) is making the code worse by deviating from the coding > >> guideline. Please drop it. > >> > > This part of the change was introduced because we had a failing test > > here[3]. There was some problem it getting both the flags propagated > > through ... > > Are you talking about the new "else" clause added to the "if" > statement we see above? I am not saying it is a "noise". > > But look at what you did to the existing call to strvec_push() to > add "-uno" shown above in the patch, i.e. the addition of space > before the parenthesis. We cannot justify that change, can we? > That's noise as far as I can see. Oh okay. Now I understand. Ya, that doesn't make sense. I thought that Eric above suggested adding it but looking at it again, Eric was saying to drop the space in the else statement below and I misunderstood that to this. I am really very sorry about this. Would change it in the next patch. Thanks again.