Re: [RFC/WIP PATCH 04/11] upload-pack-2: Implement the version 2 of upload-pack

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

 



On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 01:30:28PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:

> > Like Eric, I find the whole next_capability thing a little ugly. His
> > suggestion to pass in the parsing state is an improvement, but I wonder
> > why we need to parse at all. Can we keep the capabilities as:
> >
> >   const char *capabilities[] = {
> >         "multi_ack",
> >         "thin-pack",
> >         ... etc ...
> >   };
> >
> > and then loop over the array?
> 
> Yes, that would be much nicer. I also had this in mind but didn't know
> if there was a strong reason for the capabilities to be shoehorned
> into a single string as they are currently.

I don't think there is a good reason, beyond it being the simplest thing
for the current code to work. But as you can see from the existing
packet_write() in upload-pack, it's already going through some
contortions to handle optional capabilities (i.e., "capabilities" is by
no means the full list anymore).

Doing it item by item will mean we can't use a single packet_write() in
the v1 code, but it's OK to format into a buffer here (we already need
such a buffer for format_symref_info anyway).

-Peff
--
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]