From: Alban Gruin Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 16:57:27 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/15] sequencer: refactor sequencer_add_exec_commands() to work on a todo_list Message-ID: <6c55857a-ce3c-f9fc-18c6-d7cef2976931@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6188911e-fd21-4c7c-885d-a15d2b46aa86@talktalk.net> Hi Phillip, thanks for taking the time to review my patches. Le 11/10/2018 à 13:25, Phillip Wood a écrit : > On 07/10/2018 20:54, Alban Gruin wrote: >> @@ -4419,15 +4406,38 @@ int sequencer_add_exec_commands(const char >> *commands) >>       } >>         /* insert or append final */ >> -    if (insert >= 0 && insert < todo_list.nr) >> -        strbuf_insert(buf, todo_list.items[insert].offset_in_buf + >> +    if (insert >= 0 && insert < todo_list->nr) >> +        strbuf_insert(buf, todo_list->items[insert].offset_in_buf + >>                     offset, commands, commands_len); >>       else if (insert >= 0 || !offset) >>           strbuf_add(buf, commands, commands_len); >>   -    i = write_message(buf->buf, buf->len, todo_file, 0); >> +    if (todo_list_parse_insn_buffer(buf->buf, todo_list)) >> +        BUG("unusable todo list");} > > It is a shame to have to re-parse the todo list, I wonder how difficult > it would be to adjust the todo_list item array as the exec commands are > inserted. The same applies to the next couple of patches > Good question. This function inserts an `exec' command after every `pick' command. These commands are stored in a dynamically allocated list, grew with ALLOW_GROW(). If we want to keep the current structure, we would have to grow the size of the list by 1 and move several element to the end every time we want to add an `exec' command. It would not be very effective. Perhaps I should use a linked list here, instead. It may also work well with rearrange_squash() and skip_unnecessary_picks(). Maybe we could even get rid of the strbuf at some point. > Best Wishes > > Phillip > Cheers, Alban