Re: [PATCH] remote-curl: add testing for intelligent retry for HTTP
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Oct 13, 2020, 17:29 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqq7drukp9y.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2010131624060.50@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> We should also consider using `test-tool genrandom <seed>` instead (where > `<seed>` would have to be predictable, but probably would have to change > between `gen_nonce()` calls).
Yup, that is exactly why I asked Sean about randomness requirement.
It turns out that they care only about uniqueness, so the comparison is between keeping an ever-incrementing counter and (1) echoing its current contents and/or (2) feeding it to "test-tool genrandom" as the seed. The complexity of the code _we_ need to write anew is the same, but echo would probably be a win in both the number of forks and cycles departments.
Thanks.