From: Christian Couder Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 19:45:50 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 48/94] builtin/apply: rename 'prefix_' parameter to 'prefix' Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:43 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> Up to this point, the conversion looks quite sensible, even though I >> think the organization of fields in apply_state do not look logical. > > I'd stop here for now, as everything before this step looks > uncontroversial. Anybody whose tasked to move the global state for > these variables into a structure would reach the samestate after > applying these 48 patches, modulo minor differences in the way the > comments would say things, how the patches are split and how the > fields in apply_state() are organized. > > One thing that is missing is a counterpart of init_apply_state(). > In the early part of patches where it added only "const char *" > borrowed from the caller and fields of intregral type, the lack of > clear_apply_state() did not mattter, but with a few fields with > "string_list" type, anybody who want to make repeated call into the > apply machinery would want a way to release the resource the > structure holds. > > Because 49/94 is a step to add an unfreeable resource, this is a > good place to stop and then add the clean_apply_state() before that > happens, I would think. After that, I think both the contributor > and the reviewers would benefit if these early patches are merged > early without waiting for the review of the remainder. Ok, I will add add the clean_apply_state() and resend the patches up to that point soon, so that they can be merged early. Thanks, Christian.