From: Junio C Hamano Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2023 18:32:25 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] pack-bitmap.c: extract `fill_in_bitmap()` Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7624d3b5ba0415588a924aad2b855088e3d2028b.1682380788.git.me@ttaylorr.com> Taylor Blau writes: > To prepare for the boundary-based bitmap walk to perform a fill-in > traversal using the boundary of either side as the tips, extract routine > used to perform fill-in traversal by `find_objects()` so that it can be > used in both places. What is done is not a literal "extract", though. Worth mentioning here? > Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau > --- > pack-bitmap.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) > > + if (base == NULL) > + base = bitmap_new(); Style? > + incdata.bitmap_git = bitmap_git; > + incdata.base = base; > + incdata.seen = seen; > + > + revs->include_check = should_include; > + revs->include_check_obj = should_include_obj; > + revs->include_check_data = &incdata; > + > + if (prepare_revision_walk(revs)) > + die("revision walk setup failed"); > + > + show_data.bitmap_git = bitmap_git; > + show_data.base = base; > + > + traverse_commit_list_filtered(revs, show_commit, show_object, > + &show_data, NULL); The original uses the variant without "_filtered" suffix. In a later update when the second caller is added, the new caller may need to extend it, but shouldn't that wait until that step? Thanks.