Re: [PATCH] dir.c: fix comments to agree with argument name

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:41:36AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> >> - * If "ss" is not NULL, compute SHA-1 of the exclude file and fill
> >> + * If "oid_stat" is not NULL, compute SHA-1 of the exclude file and fill
> >
> > Makes sense. This changed as part of 4b33e60201 (dir: convert struct
> > sha1_stat to use object_id, 2018-01-28). Perhaps it would likewise make
> > sense to stop saying "SHA-1" here, and just say "hash" (or even "object
> > id", though TBH I think the fact that the hash is the same as an
> > object-id is largely an implementation detail).
> 
> I do not quite get your "though TBH", though.  I do agree with you
> that it is an implementation detail that an object is named after
> the hash of its contents, so saying "compute object name" probably
> makes sense in more context than "compute hash" outside the narrow
> parts of the code that actually implements how object names are
> computed.  So I would have expected "because TBH", not "though TBH".

Sorry, I was just confused.

The implementation detail I meant is that we are using a "struct
object_id" in the oid_stat type (and also that "oid_stat" is likewise
exposing too much). I thought this was another version of our
stat_validity, where we are checking quickly to see if a random file
that is not necessarily part of the working tree has been updated.

And indeed, we do use it that way for files like .git/info/exclude,
where having an "object_id" is really irrelevant. But we also use it for
checking the validity of tracked files, where we populate it from an
actual blob (see dir.c:do_read_blob).

So it is actually reasonable to expose that in the name, and to think
about it as an object_id.

> Anyway.  Nipunn, can you fix both of them in the same commit, as
> they are addressing a problem from the same cause (i.e. we are no
> longer SHA-1 centric).

The v2 that Nipunn sent with "oid" in the comment looks good to me.

-Peff



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux