Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> From: Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Add an empty_tree_oid object which can be used in place of
> EMPTY_TREE_SHA1_BIN_LITERAL for code which is being converted to struct
> object_id.
How widely do you envision the users of this symbol would be spread
across the entire codebase? I am debating myself if we need a
singleton in-core copy like this (if we end up referring to it from
everywhere), or we only need one level higher abstraction,
e.g. "is_empty_tree_oid()" helper (in which case I do not think we
even need a singleton; just imitate how is_empty_blob_sha1() is
implemented).
Even if we need such a singleton, I think we avoid ".field = value"
struct initializations in our code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> cache.h | 2 ++
> sha1_file.c | 3 +++
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/cache.h b/cache.h
> index f30a4417efdf..da9f0be67d7b 100644
> --- a/cache.h
> +++ b/cache.h
> @@ -964,6 +964,8 @@ static inline void oidclr(struct object_id *oid)
> #define EMPTY_BLOB_SHA1_BIN \
> ((const unsigned char *) EMPTY_BLOB_SHA1_BIN_LITERAL)
>
> +extern const struct object_id empty_tree_oid;
> +
> static inline int is_empty_blob_sha1(const unsigned char *sha1)
> {
> return !hashcmp(sha1, EMPTY_BLOB_SHA1_BIN);
> diff --git a/sha1_file.c b/sha1_file.c
> index 1e23fc186a02..10883d56a600 100644
> --- a/sha1_file.c
> +++ b/sha1_file.c
> @@ -38,6 +38,9 @@ static inline uintmax_t sz_fmt(size_t s) { return s; }
>
> const unsigned char null_sha1[20];
> const struct object_id null_oid;
> +const struct object_id empty_tree_oid = {
> + .hash = EMPTY_TREE_SHA1_BIN_LITERAL
> +};
>
> /*
> * This is meant to hold a *small* number of objects that you would
--
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