Re: What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2021, #05; Mon, 19)

From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 21, 2021, 08:26 UTC
Message-ID: <87tuo02gdd.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <YH9gPt410QBRjG59@camp.crustytoothpaste.net>

On Wed, Apr 21 2021, brian m. carlson wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On 2021-04-20 at 13:52:33, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>> This has a textual conflict (no longer a semantic one) with the above
>> ab/unexpected-object-type etc.
>> 
>> As noted in
>> https://lore.kernel.org/git/87mttx121j.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com/ I had
>> questions about the approach in hash-object.c, in particular I have
>> POC/WIP patches that make one of brian's TODO tests pass, by doing the
>> "we are in SHA256 mode" earlier, which is also less code as we won't
>> need to add special handling to a large part of hash-object.c (or, in
>> the future, other such commands).
>
> I'm going to drop those first two patches for now, since I plan to
> implement them in a different way in the future.

Using something like the:

    git --object-format=sha256 <cmd>

Approch I suggsted in https://lore.kernel.org/git/8735vq2l8a.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com/ ?

In any case having something like the OPT_OBJECT_FORMAT() I added in that WIP patch would make sense wouldn't it, to reduce the duplication of current "object-format". It would also save each current caller from doing the "unknown" and other sanity checks, since they could rely on parse_options() having died in that case.