Jeff King venit, vidit, dixit 06.02.2013 23:36:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 04:08:53PM +0100, Michael J Gruber wrote:
>> -                    add_object_array(object, arg, &list);
>> +                    add_object_array_with_context(object, arg, &list, 
>> xmemdupz(&oc, sizeof(struct object_context)));
> If we go this route, this new _with_context variant should be used in
> patch 1, too.
>> @@ -265,9 +260,28 @@ void add_object_array_with_mode(struct object *obj, 
>> const char *name, struct obj
>>      objects[nr].item = obj;
>>      objects[nr].name = name;
>>      objects[nr].mode = mode;
>> +    objects[nr].context = context;
>>      array->nr = ++nr;
>>  }
> This seems a little gross. Who is responsible for allocating the
> context? Who frees it? It looks like we duplicate it in cmd_grep. Which

Well, who is responsible for allocating and freeing name and item? I
didn't want to introduce a new member which is a struct when all other
complex members are pointers. Wouldn't that be confusing?

> I think is OK, but it means all of this context infrastructure in
> object.[ch] is just bolted-on junk waiting for somebody to use it wrong
> or get confused.  It does not get set, for example, by the regular
> setup_revisions code path.

Sure, it's NULL when there is no context info, just like in many other

> It would be nice if we could just always have the context available,
> then setup_revisions could set it up by default (and replace the "mode"
> parameter entirely). But we'd need to do something to avoid the
> PATH_MAX-sized buffer for each entry, as some code paths may have a
> large number of pending objects.

If the information is always available even if we don't need it then it
always takes space. The only way out would be pointing into a pool of
path names rather having a copy in each entry. It's not like I hadn't
talked about providing virtual (blob) objects for path names keyed by
their sha1 before... It's just that I want my grep --textconv now ;)

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to