From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 23:18:46 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Lazy-load trees when reading commit-graph
Message-ID: <xmqqr2np70dl.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180406192146.GC921@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> 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.

>
> 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.