SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 06:32:19AM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote: >> >>I rename these variables to 'num_large_edges', because the commit >> >>graph file format speaks about the 'Large Edge List' chunk. >> >> >> >>However, I do find that the term 'extra' makes much more sense >> >> >> >>Would it make sense to do the rename in the other direction? >> >I tend to agree that "large edge" is a misnomer. >> >> I agree with you both. "Extra" is better. > > OK, so here are the two patches with the rename done in the other > direction. > > These should replace the bottom two patches of the topic > 'ab/commit-graph-write-progress'. Technically it is "replace the bottom two", but it involves a bit more. The effect of this cascades down, so patch 3 and later need to be rebased on top, while doing some more s/large/extra/. I've done all that on a detached head, and the result compiles, but I'd rather see Ævar involved in the rebasing process, so I won't use the result of _my_ rebasing (besides, the "enumerate in pack order" optimization also needs rebasing on top, that is another chore). Thanks. I'd just consider these two patches as you giving feedback to Ævar's series and expect them to be included in a reroll of it. > SZEDER Gábor (2): > commit-graph: rename "large edges" to "extra edges" > commit-graph: don't call write_graph_chunk_large_edges() unnecessarily > > .../technical/commit-graph-format.txt | 4 +-- > builtin/commit-graph.c | 4 +-- > commit-graph.c | 25 ++++++++++--------- > commit-graph.h | 2 +- > t/t5318-commit-graph.sh | 14 +++++------ > 5 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
