Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Lazy-load trees when reading commit-graph
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Apr 8, 2018, 23:18 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqr2np70dl.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20180406192146.GC921@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
Show 6 quoted lines
> If I were doing it myself, I probably would have folded patches 1 and 3 > together. They are touching all the same spots, and it would be an error > for any case converted in patch 1 to not get converted in patch 3. I'm > assuming you caught them all due to Coccinelle, though IMHO it is > somewhat overkill here. By folding them together the compiler could tell > you which spots you missed.
Yeah, that approach would probably be a more sensible way to assure the safety/correctness of the result to readers better.
Show 6 quoted lines
> > And going forward, I doubt it is going to be a common error for people > to use maybe_tree directly. Between the name and the warning comment, > you'd have to really try to shoot yourself in the foot with it. The > primary concern was catching people using the existing "tree" name, > whose semantics changed.
Yup.