On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 10:30 AM Calvin Wan <calvinwan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > "Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > This series builds on en/header-cleanup > > (https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1485.v2.git.1677197376.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx/) > > and en/header-split-cleanup > > (https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1493.v2.git.1679379968.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx/), > > and continues to focus on splitting declarations from cache.h to separate > > headers. This series continues dropping the number of cache.h includes; in > > this series we go from 254 such includes to 190. > > > > The series may appear to be long at first glance, but is repetitive and > > simple. It should be relatively easy to review, and falls into roughly 3 > > categories. An overview: > > > > * Patches 1-6, 7: Being more explicit about dependencies. This was > > motivated by the fact that trying to find unnecessary dependencies on > > cache.h were being made harder by implicit dependencies on trace.h, > > trace2.h, and advice.h that were included via cache.h. (Similar to > > gettext.h handling in the previous series.) So I simply try to make > > dependencies more explicit, for both these headers and a few others. To > > make review easy, I split it into half a dozen patches, one header per > > patch (well, except that I handle trace.h and trace2.h together). Patch 7 > > then removes several includes of cache.h that are no longer needed due to > > patches 1-6. > > * Patches 8-19: For several choices of FOO, move declarations of functions > > for FOO.c from cache.h to FOO.h. To simplify reviewing, each case is > > split into two patches, with the second patch cleaning up unnecessary > > includes of cache.h in other source files. > > * Patches 20-24: Other small manual cleanups noticed while doing above work > > > > Since patches 1-15 & 17-19 are just more of the same types of patches > > already reviewed in the last two series, it probably makes more sense for > > reviewers to focus on the other patches: 16 + 20-24 (which also happen to be > > smaller). I would particularly most like review of patches 16, 22, & 24 > > since they are the least like any previously reviewed patches. > > Patches 1-15 a& 17-19 LGTM! Very welcome changes to see the size of > cache.h shrink after this and your previous series. > > I had the same change in patch 16 on a local branch, specifically moving > editor related functions from strbuf. The eventual dream for lower level > libraries such as strbuf is to separate out the functions that touch > higher level objects, allowing for the eventual libification of parts of > Git. > > Patch 20: removal of unnecessary headers are always welcome since it > allows readers to easily understand what dependencies a file has. > > Patch 21: I do have a suggestion that I will leave on the patch > > Patch 22: with what's currently in wrapper.h, it feels like it's > becoming the new dumping ground for functions that don't quite have a > home elsewhere. While I think this change makes sense right now, I do > hope in the future wrapper.h can be broken up with more reasonable > boundaries rather than "this function is a git-specific stdlib or > whatever lib function". Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised that we have multiple places needing cleanup. I haven't looked much at wrapper.[ch] from this angle, but you got me curious and I took a brief glance. Do you really mean wrapper.h, or wrapper.c? wrapper.h is actually pretty small, only declaring 8 functions. The other 32 non-static functions in wrapper.c are declared in git-compat-util.h. > Patch 23: same reasoning as with patch 20, swapping to more precise > headers clarifies file dependencies > > Patch 24: moving more items from the "dumping ground" to where they're > supposed to be :) > > Besides patch 21, the rest of the series LGTM, thanks! Thanks for taking a look!
