Continues #8105.
Review of this should be pretty straight forward. Just compare binaries. View the diff in visual diff or so.
To provide tested ACK, cherrypick paveljanik@5d2f98e and compare master build log and this PR build log.
Continues #8105.
Review of this should be pretty straight forward. Just compare binaries. View the diff in visual diff or so.
To provide tested ACK, cherrypick paveljanik@5d2f98e and compare master build log and this PR build log.
386 | @@ -387,7 +387,7 @@ bool CDB::Rewrite(const string& strFile, const char* pszSkip) 387 | while (fSuccess) { 388 | CDataStream ssKey(SER_DISK, CLIENT_VERSION); 389 | CDataStream ssValue(SER_DISK, CLIENT_VERSION); 390 | - int ret = db.ReadAtCursor(pcursor, ssKey, ssValue, DB_NEXT); 391 | + ret = db.ReadAtCursor(pcursor, ssKey, ssValue, DB_NEXT);
I'm not sure promoting these return values up to the function scope is a good idea. Keeping the scope of variables as small as possible ensures that results won't leak or accidentally influence other things.
Technically speaking, this is not directly function scope.
But yes, one view is to have only one return value variable, the other is one return value variable per function call.
Renaming ret to ret1 here could make this particular change smaller.
Yes, I'd prefer just renaming
Done and squashed - now all the changes are of the same kind.
ACK: objdump -d $bin returns the same binaries for me on d5b25fa
more ACKs please
utACK d5b25fa5792b3899759a73059a87c6b015fc8535
Rebased.
Also compared binaries, tACK b175cb7