Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] list-objects-filter: teach tree:# how to handle >0
- From
- Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
- Date
- Jan 8, 2019, 01:56 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20190108015631.22727-1-jonathantanmy@google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20181210234030.176178-2-matvore@google.com>
Thanks - as stated in your commit message, this adds quite a useful piece of functionality.
Show 21 quoted lines
> - case LOFS_BEGIN_TREE:
> - case LOFS_BLOB:
> - if (filter_data->omits) {
> - oidset_insert(filter_data->omits, &obj->oid);
> - /* _MARK_SEEN but not _DO_SHOW (hard omit) */
> - return LOFR_MARK_SEEN;
> - } else {
> - /*
> - * Not collecting omits so no need to to traverse tree.
> - */
> - return LOFR_SKIP_TREE | LOFR_MARK_SEEN;
> - }
> -
> case LOFS_END_TREE:
> assert(obj->type == OBJ_TREE);
> + filter_data->current_depth--;
> return LOFR_ZERO;
>
> + case LOFS_BLOB:
> + filter_trees_update_omits(obj, filter_data, include_it);
> + return include_it ? LOFR_MARK_SEEN | LOFR_DO_SHOW : LOFR_ZERO;Any reason for moving "case LOFS_BLOB" (and "case LOFS_BEGIN_TREE" below) after LOFS_END_TREE?
This is drastically different from the previous case, but this makes sense - previously, all blobs accessed through traversal were not shown, but now they are sometimes shown. Here, filter_trees_update_omits() is only ever used to remove a blob from the omits set, since once this blob is encountered with include_it == true, it is marked as LOFR_MARK_SEEN and will not be traversed again.
Show 5 quoted lines
> + case LOFS_BEGIN_TREE:
> + seen_info = oidmap_get(
> + &filter_data->seen_at_depth, &obj->oid);
> + if (!seen_info) {
> + seen_info = xcalloc(1, sizeof(struct seen_map_entry));Use sizeof(*seen_info).
> + seen_info->base.oid = obj->oid;
We have been using oidcpy, but come to think of it, I'm not sure why...
Show 6 quoted lines
> + seen_info->depth = filter_data->current_depth; > + oidmap_put(&filter_data->seen_at_depth, seen_info); > + already_seen = 0; > + } else > + already_seen = > + filter_data->current_depth >= seen_info->depth;
There has been recently some clarification that if one branch of an if/else construct requires braces, braces should be put on all of them: 1797dc5176 ("CodingGuidelines: clarify multi-line brace style", 2017-01-17). Likewise below.
Show 12 quoted lines
> + if (already_seen)
> + filter_res = LOFR_SKIP_TREE;
> + else {
> + seen_info->depth = filter_data->current_depth;
> + filter_trees_update_omits(obj, filter_data, include_it);
> +
> + if (include_it)
> + filter_res = LOFR_DO_SHOW;
> + else if (filter_data->omits)
> + filter_res = LOFR_ZERO;
> + else
> + filter_res = LOFR_SKIP_TREE;Looks straightforward. If we have already seen it at a shallower or equal depth, we can skip it (since we have already done the appropriate processing). Otherwise, we need to ensure that its "omit" is correctly set, and: - show it if include_it - don't do anything special if not include_it and we need the omit set - skip the tree if not include_it and we don't need the omit set
Show 5 quoted lines
> +static void filter_trees_free(void *filter_data) {
> + struct filter_trees_depth_data* d = filter_data;
> + oidmap_free(&d->seen_at_depth, 1);
> + free(d);
> +}Check for NULL-ness of filter_data too, to match the usual behavior of free functions.
> diff --git a/t/t6112-rev-list-filters-objects.sh b/t/t6112-rev-list-filters-objects.sh > index eb32505a6e..54e7096d40 100755 > --- a/t/t6112-rev-list-filters-objects.sh > +++ b/t/t6112-rev-list-filters-objects.sh
[snip]
Thanks for the tests that cover quite a wide range of cases. Can you also demonstrate the case where a blob would normally be omitted (because it is too deep) but it is directly specified, so it is included.
Show 9 quoted lines
> +expect_has_with_different_name () {
> + repo=$1 &&
> + name=$2 &&
> +
> + hash=$(git -C $repo rev-parse HEAD:$name) &&
> + ! grep "^$hash $name$" actual &&
> + grep "^$hash " actual &&
> + ! grep "~$hash" actual
> +}Should we also check that a "~" entry appears with $name?