Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] worktree: add 'for_each_worktree' function

> Stepping back a bit, is a for-each-foo()-style interface desirable?
> This sort of interface imposes a good deal of complexity on callers,
> demanding a callback function and callback data (cb_data), and is
> generally (at least in C) more difficult to reason about than other
> simpler interfaces. Is such complexity warranted?
> 
> An alternate, much simpler interface would be to have a function, say
> get_worktrees(), return an array of 'worktree' structures to the
> caller, which the caller would iterate over (which is a common
> operation in C, thus easily reasoned about).
> 
> The one benefit of a for-each-foo()-style interface is that it's
> possible to "exit early", thus avoiding the cost of interrogating
> meta-data for worktrees in which the caller is not interested,
> however, it seems unlikely that there will be so many worktrees linked
> to a repository for this early exit to translate into any real
> savings.