Re: [PATCH] t1092: use GIT_PROGRESS_DELAY for consistent results

> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:57:52AM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>> On Mon, May 24 2021, Taylor Blau wrote:
>>
>>> But I don't think this isolated instance should push in the direction of
>>> adding support for either of the above, regardless of how easy it might
>>> be.
>>
>> I don't see why we wouldn't just tweak GIT_PROGRESS_DELAY to support -1
>> or something for "inf".
> 
> Ironically, I think that this already works, since we parse the value of
> GIT_PROGRESS_DELAY as unsigned, and don't bother checking for if the
> input is negative (since we eventually call git_parse_unsigned(), which
> doesn't have any extra checks other than for overflow).
> 
> So we silently convert -1 to 2^64-1, and call it a day.