Re: [PATCH 12/21] patch-ids.c: remove implicit dependency on the_index

>
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 11:03 AM Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 9:13 PM Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > -int init_patch_ids(struct patch_ids *ids)
> > > > +int init_patch_ids(struct patch_ids *ids, struct repository *repo)
> > > >  {
> > > >         memset(ids, 0, sizeof(*ids));
> > > > -       diff_setup(&ids->diffopts, the_repository);
> > > > +       diff_setup(&ids->diffopts, repo);
> > >
> > > Just realized when looking at this diff, though it applies to
> > > other patches as well. (and reading Documentation/technical/api-diff.txt
> > > confirms my thinking IMHO)
> > >
> > > What makes the repository argument any special compared
> > > to the rest of the diff options?
> > >
> > > So I would expect the setup to look like
> > >
> > >     memset(ids, 0, sizeof(*ids));
> > >     ids->diffopts->repo = the_repository;
> > >     diff_setup(&ids->diffopts);
> > >
> > > here and in diff_setup, we'd have
> > >
> > >   if (!options->repo)
> > >     options->repo = the_repository;
> > >
> > > or even put the_repository into default_diff_options,
> > > but then I wonder how this deals with no-repo invocations
> > > (git diff --no-index examples for bug reports)
> >
> > That makes "repo" field optional and I'm very much against falling
> > back to the_repository. revisions.c in the end does not have any
> > the_repository reference, and it's actually undefined for most files.
> > This makes accidentally adding the_repository back much more
> > difficult.
>
> Thanks for the clear explanation. I agree that this is a good approach
> with these reasons given. So in case a resend is needed, maybe add
> these to the commit message, as it explains why we deviate from
> the pattern here.

> > Yes the --no-index stuff will have to be taken care of at some point,
> > but I think for now we could just put "struct repository *" in place
> > first to see what it looks like, then go from there.
>
> I would think repo = NULL would do? But we can defer this
> discussion to later.