Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> +/*
> + * Given a ref (sha1, refname) see if it points to one of the sha1s
> + * in a sha1_array.
> + */
> +static int match_points_at(struct sha1_array *points_at, const unsigned char *sha1,
> + const char *refname)
> +{
> + struct object *obj;
> +
> + if (!points_at || !points_at->nr)
> + return 1;
> +
> + if (sha1_array_lookup(points_at, sha1) >= 0)
> + return 1;
> +
> + obj = parse_object_or_die(sha1, refname);
> + if (obj->type == OBJ_TAG &&
> + sha1_array_lookup(points_at, ((struct tag *)obj)->tagged->sha1) >= 0)
> + return 1;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
Interesting. I think the change done while copying the code does
not change anything from the original (other than that the helper
lost its ability to return the peeled object name), and I think you
shouldn't make any change while copying the code that would change
the benaviour, but I notice a few things that we might want to keep
in mind and revisit them later (i.e. might be a good idea to add
NEEDSWORK comment to record them near the function):
- The original only peeled one level of indirection, so does this
implementation. But is that really what we want, I wonder?
After doing:
$ git tag -a -m 'annotated' atag $commit
$ git tag -a -m 'annotated doubly' dtag atag
atag^0, dtag^0 and $commit all refer to the same commit object.
Do we want to miss dtag with --point-at=$commit?
- As we are in for-each-ref (or eventually tag -l) that is walking
the cached refs, we may know what refname peels to without
parsing the object at all. Could it be more efficient to ask
peel_ref() for the pointee without doing parse_object()
ourselves?
--
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