On 19/12/2022 15:11, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
On Mon, Dec 19 2022, Phillip Wood wrote:
Hi Ævar
On 15/12/2022 09:58, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
My recent now-landed topic[1] to remove most use of
"USE_THE_INDEX_COMPATIBILITY_MACROS" was merged in 041df69edd3 (Merge
branch 'ab/fewer-the-index-macros', 2022-11-28).
It left out use of the macros that would have conflicted with
in-flight changes, but as those topics have landed we can now complete
the migration.
As before this is almost entirely a matter of applying the existing
"pending" coccinelle rules, the exceptions being 1/6, and the *.h
changes where we remove the macro definitions (the macro users being
edited by coccinelle).
The 4-5/6 then handle some edge cases we had left (but the code
change
itself is done by coccinelle).
I've only given these patches a quick scan, but I think they look
good. None of the callers that are converted here are in library code
so using the_index makes perfect sense.
Thanks for the review.
That's correct, although even if that were the case that wouldn't be an
issue with this migration, as we'd have been using "the_index" before,
just indirectly through a macro.
Indeed, I'm just not convinced that it is worth removing the macro in
library code without changing to take a struct istate (I don't see the
existence of the macro itself as a problem as I think it is just a
symptom of the real problem) but I seem to be in the minority on that point.
Best Wishes
Phillip
That wasn't the case here, but I do I have another similar migration for
migrating "the_repository" wrappers.
In those cases there's surely instances where e.g. we really should be
using a "r" argument instead, but I've opted to leave that question out,
as it would make the coccinelle rules involved & diffs much harder to
deal with.
And because in the end the result is the same if viewed with "cc -E",
i.e. these are just the macro shims we've been meaning to stop using for
a while.
