Re: [PATCH] Fix parse_args cycle limit check.

[Randy Dunlap]

On 12/18/2017 09:34 AM, Michal SuchÃnek wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Dec 2017 15:49:09 -0800
> Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> On 12/15/2017 01:41 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>>> Actually args are supposed to be renamed to next so both and args
>>> hold the previous argument so both can be passed to the callback.
>>> This additionla patch  
>>
>>                                                                 additional
>>
>>> should fix up the rename.  
>>
>> Would you try rewriting the first sentence, please? I don't get it.
> 
> Ok, I guess this should be clarified. For the original patch and the
> fixup squashed together this is what the patch is supposed to do:
> 
> This patch adds variable for tracking the parameter which is currently
> being processed. There is "args" variable which tracks the parameter
> which will be processed next so this patch adds "next" variable to
> track that and uses "args" to track the current argument.

OK, thanks.


-- 
~Randy