Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> diff --git a/ls-refs.c b/ls-refs.c
> index f385938b64..6f490b2d9c 100644
> --- a/ls-refs.c
> +++ b/ls-refs.c
> @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ int ls_refs(struct repository *r, struct packet_reader *request)
> strvec_push(&data.prefixes, "");
> refs_for_each_fullref_in_prefixes(get_main_ref_store(r),
> get_git_namespace(), data.prefixes.v,
> - send_ref, &data);
> + NULL, send_ref, &data);
OK.
> diff --git a/ref-filter.c b/ref-filter.c
> index d44418efb7..717c3c4bcf 100644
> --- a/ref-filter.c
> +++ b/ref-filter.c
> @@ -2209,12 +2209,13 @@ static int for_each_fullref_in_pattern(struct ref_filter *filter,
>
> if (!filter->name_patterns[0]) {
> /* no patterns; we have to look at everything */
> - return for_each_fullref_in("", cb, cb_data);
> + return refs_for_each_fullref_in(get_main_ref_store(the_repository),
> + "", NULL, cb, cb_data);
> }
Is this merely "while at it", or was there a reason why refs_*
variant must be used here? It is curious that we do not teach the
exclude_patterns to some functions like for_each_fullref_in() while
adding exclude_patterns to others, making the API surface uneven.
