From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 10:28:33 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 40/49] builtin/repack.c: introduce `struct write_pack_opts`
Message-ID: <20251015102833.GB2250228@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <109109618687efeb932bee7dd5882557ab0576f4.1759097191.git.me@ttaylorr.com>

On Sun, Sep 28, 2025 at 06:09:51PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote:

> Instead of repeating those arguments for each function, let's extract an
> options struct called "write_pack_opts" which has these three parameters
> as member fields. While we're at it, add fields for "packdir," and
> "packtmp", both of which are static variables within the builtin, and
> need to be read from within these two functions.

Makes sense, although...

> +		struct write_pack_opts opts = {
> +			.po_args = &po_args,
> +			.destination = filter_to,
> +			.pack_prefix = find_pack_prefix(packdir, packtmp),
> +			.packdir = packdir,
> +			.packtmp = packtmp,
> +		};

...since we are now passing packdir and packtmp anyway, and pack_prefix
is derived from those, should the called function just do that
derivation itself? Or do we expect that some callers may eventually use
a different prefix?

Probably not a huge deal either way, but maybe an easy way to tighten up
the interface a bit.

-Peff