Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 22:57:39 -0500
From: Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>
To: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] notmuch-reply.c: uncrustify
Message-ID: <20120112035739.GW20796@mit.edu>
References: <1324135695-15487-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net>
	<1326197228-10356-1-git-send-email-david@tethera.net>
	<1326197228-10356-3-git-send-email-david@tethera.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1326197228-10356-3-git-send-email-david@tethera.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org, David Bremner <bremner@debian.org>
Precedence: list

Quoth David Bremner on Jan 10 at  8:07 am:
> From: David Bremner <bremner@debian.org>
> 
> This patch shows the raw result of running uncrustify on notmuch-reply.c.
> The re-indenting of "format_reply" would probably not be desirable.

The good news is that that structure is on its way out.

> @@ -625,6 +612,7 @@ notmuch_reply_command (void *ctx, int argc, char *argv[])
>      notmuch_query_t *query;
>      char *query_string;
>      int opt_index, ret = 0;
> +

This one's a little weird.  Did it get confused by the function
prototype?

>      int (*reply_format_func)(void *ctx, notmuch_config_t *config, notmuch_query_t *query, notmuch_show_params_t *params);
>      notmuch_show_params_t params = { .part = -1 };
>      int format = FORMAT_DEFAULT;

All of the other format fixes look very reasonable to me.  I think you
managed to find one of the least canonical source files in the tree.
Was that intentional?