Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2008, #05; Tue, 19)

From: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@frugalware.org>
Date: Aug 19, 2008, 20:59 UTC
Message-ID: <20080819205917.GJ23800@genesis.frugalware.org>
In-Reply-To: <7vabf83j9u.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 12:19:09PM -0700, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> Since the latter is what everybody else ("checkout -m", "revert",
> "cherry-pick", "am -3", "stash apply") should be using, I think it is
> pretty much up to "git-merge" and "git-merge-recursive" implementations
> how the caller of merge_recursive() function is structured.  I suspect
> that you would not need two separate functions, _setup() and _generic(),
> for these two codepaths, but I didn't look closely.

Sure, I can avoid _generic() and use merge_recursive() directly, that's why I asked.

> And make_virtual_commit() should become static inside merge_recursive.c;
> use of these fake commits is strictly an internal implementation issue of
> how merge_recursive() function works and does not concern the caller, does
> it?

Not exactly. builtin-merge-recursive uses get_ref() - which should not be in merge-recursive.c IMHO - and get_ref() uses make_virtual_commit(). merge_recursive() itself takes commits, so it can be only static if we copy it builtin-merge-recursive as well, causing a code duplication. Or have I missed something here?

Thanks.