Re: [PATCH v6 5/6] bisect--helper: reimplement `bisect_run` shell

> "Miriam R." <mirucam@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >> However, I still don't like that we play such a `dup2()` game. I gave it a
> >> quick try to avoid it (see the diff below, which corresponds to the commit
> >> I pushed up as `git-bisect-work-part4-v7` to
> >> https://github.com/dscho/git), which still could benefit from a bit of
> >> polishing (maybe we should rethink the object model and extend/rename
> >> `bisect_terms` to `bisect_state` and accumulate more fields, such as
> >> `out_fd`.
> >>
> >> Obviously this will need to be cleaned up, and while I would _love_ to see
> >> this make it into your next iteration, ultimately it is up to you, Miriam,
> >> to decide whether you want to build on my diff (quite possibly making the
> >> entire object model of the bisect part of Git's code more elegant and more
> >> maintainable), and up to you, Junio, to decide whether you would be
> >> willing to accept the patch series without this refactoring.
>
> If the code paths involved are shallow and narrow enough that not
> too many existing callers need to start passing FILE *stdout down
> (from the looks of your illustration patch, it does not seem to be
> too bad), I do not mind a series that is a bit longer than the
> current 6-patch series that has a preliminary enhancement step that
> allows callers to pass their own "FILE *" for output destination
> before the main part of the topic.