Re: [PATCH 01/18] Introduce fsck options
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Dec 22, 2014, 17:32 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqq61d3bnf9.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.DEB.1.00.1412221822310.21312@s15462909.onlinehome-server.info>
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
Show 11 quoted lines
>> Is it a good idea to allow walker to be strict but obj verifier to >> be not (or vice versa)? I am wondering why this is not a single >> struct with two callback function pointers. > > Unfortunately not. There are two different walkers used, and in fact, > fsck_walk_options() is only used to walk the objects, not to fsck them. > > Now, I could use only one struct and set the walker, but that is not > thread-safe, and while code is not threaded yet AFAICT, it might be in the > future. That is why I decided to be rather safe than sorry. If you want it > differently, please just say the word, I will make it so.
Thanks for explaining; I just found that the reason behind the design choice was unclear and wanted to know.