Re: Question about the revision walking API

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,


On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 3:02 AM, Mike Hommey <mh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to know if the revision walking API works as one would
> expect with a calling sequence like the following:
>
> - init_revisions
> - add_pending_object/setup_revisions
> - prepare_revision_walk
> - get_revision (repeated)
> - reset_revision_walk (I guess)
> - add_pending_object
> - prepare_revision_walk
> - get_revision (repeated)
>
> That is, do a first revision walk based on a given rev_info, then reuse that
> rev_info with additional commit objects (in my case, I want to add more
> UNINTERESTING commits) and redo a revision walk based on the modified
> rev_info (so, avoid reinitializing a rev_info and filling it from
> scratch again with the additional UNINTERESTING commits).
>
> I guess I could try and see if that works, but I'd rather have an
> informed answer than to derive my own from the fact my testcase would
> happen to work by chance.

I am not sure what you describe above would work, but something like
what is done in bisect.c should work, see check_ancestors() and
bisect_next_all(). It might not be the most efficient solution though,
so I am interested if you find something more efficient.

Best,
Christian.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]