Re: [PATCH 2/6] lex: Mark variables with const init as const

[Oliver Kiddle <opk@xxxxxxx>]

Jörg Sommer wrote:
> Yes, it's a kind of chicken egg problem. Either it gets a really big patch
> or you have steps that introduce new warnings and solve them with later
> patches. I don't know what you prefer for review.

For now, I've applied those four (of the six) patches that don't
introduce new warnings.

> My main question is how this patch set should be organized? One commit per
> file which reduces the number of warnings in this file to the cost of new
> warnings in other files?

Separating patches by source file is probably not the most helpful. I'd
prefer if at least each patch series doesn't add new warnings so that
we're leaving the source tree in a decent state when pushing. There
might be some things that initially look like they clearly should be
marked const but as the const percolates through you get stuck.

Perhaps start with something like statusline, resolve the knock-on
effects of marking that const and at that point finalise it as a single
patch. If a subset of the changes can be applied standalone, consider
separating that out. But really, whatever works for you is fine.

Oliver