Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] roll back locks in various code paths

From: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Date: Mar 1, 2018, 06:18 UTC
Message-ID: <CAN0heSpcaR3bzHuD3AG48p8DagD_HDY8kVxYNctS1Qhoopcvqg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqr2p4itvh.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>

On 1 March 2018 at 00:20, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> A further upshot of this patch is that `active_cache_changed`, which is
>> defined as `the_index.cache_changed`, now only has a few users left.
>
> I am undecided if this is a *good* thing.  In a few codepaths where
> we make a speculative update to the on-disk index file, I find that
> the explicit mention of active_cache_changed clarifies what is going
> on.  Perhaps once my (and other old timers') eyes get used to this
> new SKIP_IF_UNCHANGED symbol, it would start serving the same
> purpose ;-)

Right, you might say that this trades one symbol for another. What I meant was, we only have a few "active_cache_changed" and soon (TM) they might all be "the_index.cache_changed" or "index->cache_changed" and the macro could be retired. My understanding of the history is limited, but I was under the impression that this was like a transition macro (albeit a very old one!).

Martin