On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Stefan, > > [I was intrigued enough by your work to postpone to later this coming week > reading the What's cooking email in favor of reviewing your patch series.] > > On Fri, 27 Oct 2017, Stefan Beller wrote: > >> With traverse_trees_and_blobs factored out of the main traverse function, >> the next patch can introduce an in-order revision walking with ease. > > Makes sense. > >> diff --git a/list-objects.c b/list-objects.c >> index b3931fa434..0ee0551604 100644 >> --- a/list-objects.c >> +++ b/list-objects.c >> @@ -183,25 +183,13 @@ static void add_pending_tree(struct rev_info *revs, struct tree *tree) >> add_pending_object(revs, &tree->object, ""); >> } >> >> -void traverse_commit_list(struct rev_info *revs, >> - show_commit_fn show_commit, >> - show_object_fn show_object, >> - void *data) >> +static void traverse_trees_and_blobs(struct rev_info *revs, >> + struct strbuf *base, > > In the context of one function, it was obvious what `base` meant. Maybe we > can call it `base_path` now? I was intrigued to keep the base local to the factored out function, but that would mean, we'd have to allocate memory for it in every call. That I wanted to avoid, so the only reason to pass it in, is memory management. base_path sounds good, will rename. Thanks for the review! Stefan > > Thanks, > Dscho
