repo: remove redundant variable shadow in stats_table_print_structure

[MansiSingh17]

The variable i is declared in the outer scope of
stats_table_print_structure() and then re-declared inside the loop,
shadowing the outer one unnecessarily. Remove the redundant inner
declaration to clean up the scope.

Signed-off-by: Mansi Singh mansimaanu8627@gmail.com
cc: K Jayatheerth jayatheerthkulkarni2005@gmail.com

[dscho]

/allow

[gitgitgadget]

User MansiSingh17 already allowed to use GitGitGadget.

[MansiSingh17]

/submit

[gitgitgadget]

Error: Ignoring PR with empty title and/or body

[MansiSingh17]

/submit

[gitgitgadget]

Submitted as pull.2062.git.1773109018.gitgitgadget@gmail.com

To fetch this version into FETCH_HEAD:

git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/ pr-2062/MansiSingh17/repo-fix-variable-shadow-v1

To fetch this version to local tag pr-2062/MansiSingh17/repo-fix-variable-shadow-v1:

git fetch --no-tags https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/ tag pr-2062/MansiSingh17/repo-fix-variable-shadow-v1

[gitgitgadget]

Junio C Hamano wrote on the Git mailing list (how to reply to this email):

"Mansi Singh via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

> The variable i is declared in the outer scope of
> stats_table_print_structure() and then re-declared inside the loop,
> shadowing the outer one unnecessarily. Remove the redundant inner
> declaration to clean up the scope.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mansi Singh mansimaanu8627@gmail.com

The above sounds more like a description for a single patch, not a
cover letter.

Because we strongly encourage one patch doing only one thing and
doing it well, a commit log message for one of the patches in a
two-patch series rarely makes a good description for the whole
series.

But reading it again, which variable 'i' is it talking about?  [2/2]
does address 'entry' that is declared in an inner scope, masking the
variable with the same name declared in an outer scope.

Stepping back a bit, I do not quite see the need for these two
patcches to form a single topic.  They look pretty much totally
independent topics.  Perhaps you're better off treating them as two
independent topics, each with a single patch.

> Mansi (1):
>   t7605: use test_path_is_file instead of test -f
>
> Mansi Singh (1):
>   repo: remove redundant variable shadow in stats_table_print_structure

Are these two patches from two different people?

Last time in https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqv7fjw6yx.fsf@gitster.g/
we had three names, and we now have only two, so that can be called
an improvement, but let's whittle them down to just one ;-).

Thanks.

[gitgitgadget]

K Jayatheerth wrote on the Git mailing list (how to reply to this email) regarding 4adf6d4 (outdated):

> Remove the inner redeclaration since the outer 'entry' is already
> available and non-NULL at that point.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mansi Singh <mansimaanu8627@gmail.com>
> ---
>  builtin/repo.c | 1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/repo.c b/builtin/repo.c
> index 0ea045abc1..5540bd25d2 100644
> --- a/builtin/repo.c
> +++ b/builtin/repo.c
> @@ -412,7 +412,6 @@ static void stats_table_print_structure(const struct stats_table *table)
>  		const char *unit = "";
>
>  		if (entry) {
> -			struct stats_table_entry *entry = item->util;
>  			value = entry->value;
>  			if (entry->unit)
>  				unit = entry->unit;
> --
> gitgitgadget

Hi Mansi,

This is a good catch
but I have to say this patch is already sent by me
And is also merged into the master branch [1].

You can search in the mailing list or sometimes check the
"What's cooking in git.git" (recent one [2]) before making the changes.
You don't need anyone's permission to work on a patch
but it is also important to not step on someone's toes ;)

1 - https://github.com/git/git/commit/676c145afdd88024057296f11fdf2c224001549e
2 - https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqh5qozdkq.fsf@gitster.g/T/#u

coming to the double naming problem
That is because one of your patch is using `format-patch` and `send-email` method of sending patches
and the other one is using `gitgitgadget`.

My suggestion would be to stick with one and move forward with that for the entirety.

Regards,
- Jayatheerth

[gitgitgadget]

User K Jayatheerth <jayatheerthkulkarni2005@gmail.com> has been added to the cc: list.