Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] list-objects: filter objects in traverse_commit_list

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 17, 2017, 02:14 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqh8tttzwq.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20171116215725.k44e3alk2lq6bbwu@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 5 quoted lines

> Those encodings don't necessarily need to be the same, because they're
> about transport. Inside each process we'd have the raw bytes, and encode
> them as appropriate to whatever sub-program we're going to pass to (or
> not at all if we skip the shell for sub-processes, which is usually a
> good idea).

Yes, I share the same feeling. It does not help that the series defines its own notion of arg_needs_armor() and uses it to set a field called requires_armor that is not yet used, the definition of "armor"ing being each byte getting encoded as two hexadecimal digits without any sign (which makes me wonder what a receiver of "deadbeef" would do---did it receive an armored string or a plain one???). I do not understand why these strings are not passed as opaque sequences of bytes and instead converted at this low a layer.