Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] index_has_changes(): avoid assuming operating on the_index

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jul 3, 2018, 19:44 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq601wqf3u.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180701012503.14382-3-newren@gmail.com>

Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

> Modify index_has_changes() to take a struct istate* instead of just
> operating on the_index.  This is only a partial conversion, though,
> because we call do_diff_cache() which implicitly assumes work is to be
> done on the_index.  Ongoing work is being done elsewhere to do the
> remainder of the conversion, and thus is not duplicated here.  Instead,
> a simple check is put in place until that work is complete.

Yeah, that is an unfortunate but necessary compromise until we create do_diff_index() that can take an istate, and optionally turn do_diff_cache() into

    #define do_diff_cache(...) do_diff_index(&the_index, ...)

if there are many callers that want to work on the default in-core istate.