Josh Steadmon <steadmon@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> Having a look at the final structure of the loop with these gotos, I'm a
>> little confused. Could be this isn't C-idiomatic but I think the code
>> could be easier to read with helpers instead of gotos. I realize it's
>> longer but I have a hard time understanding that your gotos are used to
>> double-continue or double-break; nested loops tend to make me want to
>> use helpers. But - I'm a lowly barely-reformed C++ developer, so what do
>> I know ;)
>>
>> int oid_in_promisor(oid) {
>> for (p = get_all_packs(the_repository); p; p = p->next) {
>> if (!p->pack_promisor)
>> continue;
>> if (find_pack_entry_one(oid.hash, p)
>> return 1;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> int all_oids_in_promisors(oid, fn, cb_data)
>> {
>> do {
>> if (! oid_in_promisor(oid))
>> return 0;
>> } while (!fn(cb_data, &oid));
>> return 1;
>> }
>>
>> int check_connected(...)
>> {
>> ...
>> if (has_promisor_remote()) {
>> if (all_oids_in_promisors(oid, fn, cb_data))
>> return 0;
>> if (opt->shallow_file) {
>> ...
>> }
>
> I like this version better as well.
Sounds good. Jonathan? I've squashed Josh'es Reviewed-by, but I
will refrain from merging it to 'next' just yet to see if you too
like the proposed code structure.
Thanks, all.
