On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 11:12 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Stuff I'd most welcome review on: > > * Is cache-tree.c the right place for write_tree_from_memory()? > > [see patch 7] Should there be docs on how it differs from > > write_index_as_tree(), already found in cache-tree? What does > > the latter even do? > > write_index_as_tree() is supposed to write the contents of an index > state as a tree object, and return the object ID for the resulting > tree. It is the primary interface designed to be used by > write-tree. Other than the last sentence, that also sounds like the description of write_index_as_tree() -- at least as best I understood it. But I don't understand enough of the cache-tree and locking code to determine if these are accidental duplicates of the same functionality (meaning we could delete one, or rewrite one in terms of the other), or whether there's a useful distinction between the two. I guess it doesn't hurt for now to have both, but I was curious if perhaps one was more robust, and wanted to at least flag it for someone to take a look.
