Re: RFA: implement ambiguous linespec proposal

Tom Tromey
2011-11-01T20:38:18Z

>>>>> "Matt" == Matt Rice <ratmice@gmail.com> writes:

Tom> I'd appreciate comments on this patch.

Matt> In the following snippet, the initial comment doesn't mention
Matt> destroy_linespec_result, and some of the field comments mention
Matt> that the caller is responsible for freeing.
Matt> destroy_linespec_result seems to fulfill this obligation,

Matt> I imagine that the comments just predate destroy_linespec_result, or
Matt> there is an OR situation e.g. if the caller wants to save some fields
Matt> they are responsible. Anyhow it'd be nice to clarify that in the
Matt> comments.

Yeah, that's what happened.
Thanks for noticing this; I cleaned up the comments on my local branch.

Tom