merge: small code readability improvement

After our loop through the selected strategies, we compare best_strategy
to wt_strategy.  This is fine, but the fact that the code setting
best_strategy sets it to use_strategies[i]->name requires a little bit
of extra checking to determine that at the time of setting, that's the
same as wt_strategy.  Just setting best_strategy to wt_strategy makes it
a little easier to verify what the loop is doing, at least for this
reader.

Further, use_strategies[i]->name is used in a number of places, where we
could just use wt_strategy.  The latter takes less time for this reader
to parse (one variable name instead of three), so just use wt_strategy
to make the code slightly faster for human readers to parse.

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This commit is contained in:
Elijah Newren 2022-08-23 02:42:21 +00:00 committed by Junio C Hamano
parent 5b1d30cabf
commit ae15fd4116

View file

@ -1707,7 +1707,7 @@ int cmd_merge(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
*/
wt_strategy = use_strategies[i]->name;
ret = try_merge_strategy(use_strategies[i]->name,
ret = try_merge_strategy(wt_strategy,
common, remoteheads,
head_commit);
/*
@ -1722,12 +1722,12 @@ int cmd_merge(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
* another.
*/
merge_was_ok = 1;
best_strategy = use_strategies[i]->name;
best_strategy = wt_strategy;
break;
}
cnt = (use_strategies_nr > 1) ? evaluate_result() : 0;
if (best_cnt <= 0 || cnt <= best_cnt) {
best_strategy = use_strategies[i]->name;
best_strategy = wt_strategy;
best_cnt = cnt;
}
}