Could you please add a test to make sure we don't regress? Thanks

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/misc/stdbuf (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

I know the compiler is smart enough to understand that the Skippedenum is just a boolean, but does it really need to be a dedicated type ? Why not rather use a simple boolean ?

I'm not a fan of using a boolean, as it often makes the code harder to read.

Maybe it helps to think about what the function does:

• it copies a file,
• or it skips a file,
• or it fails

Thus, we have three potential outcomes: two success cases and one error case. My suggestion is to explicitly express the success cases as an enum, something like:

enum SomeName {
    Copied,
    Skipped,
}

I'm not a fan of using a boolean, as it often makes the code harder to read.

Maybe it helps to think about what the function does:

* it copies a file,

* or it skips a file,

* or it fails

Thus, we have three potential outcomes: two success cases and one error case. My suggestion is to explicitly express the success cases as an enum, something like:

enum SomeName {
    Copied,
    Skipped,
}

I also like self explaining variables and return types. And I agree that:

enum Skipped {
    No,
    Yes
} 

is a bad name. I reused the enum Preserve logic.

What do you think about:

enum PerformedAction {
    Copied,
    Skipped
} 

Sounds good to me 👍

You can fixup the rename commit ?

I mean your third commit should be stashed in the first or second one.
The Skipped enum you create in your first commit don't exist anymore in the third one, so there's no reason it should appear in the commit history of the main branch

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/timeout/timeout (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)

LGTM 👍

@BigPapa314 thanks for your PR!