Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] ref-filter: add objectsize:disk option
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Nov 22, 2018, 11:33 UTC
- Message-ID
- <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1811221232370.41@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqa7m39swq.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
Hi Junio,
On Wed, 21 Nov 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 19 quoted lines
> Оля Тележная <olyatelezhnaya@gmail.com> writes: > > >> I am OK if we avoid PRIdMAX and use PRIuMAX instead with a cast to > >> the corresponding size in this codepath, as long as we properly > >> handle negative oi.disk_size field, which may be telling some > >> "unusual" condition to us. > > > > Maybe we want to change the type (from off_t to unsigned) directly in > > struct object_info? That will help us not to make additional > > checkings. Or, at least, I suggest to add check to > > oid_object_info_extended() so that this function will give a guarantee > > that the size is non-negative. > > I am fine with the approach. The potential gain of allowing > oi.disk_size is it would allow the code to say "I'll give these > pieces of info about the object, but the on-disk size is unknown" > without failing the whole object_info_extended() request. And I > personally do not think such an ability is not all that important > or useful.
I see that this topic advanced to `next`, which means that the Windows build of `next` is now broken.
To fix this, I prepared a GitGitGadget PR (https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/87) and will submit it as soon as I am satisfied that the build works.
Ciao, Dscho