On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 05:12:32PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote: > Now that the `midx_contains_pack()` versus `midx_locate_pack()` debacle > has been cleaned up, teach the former about how to operate in an > incremental MIDX-aware world in a similar fashion as in previous > commits. > > Instead of using either of the two `midx_for_object()` or > `midx_for_pack()` helpers, this function is split into two: one that > determines whether a pack is contained in a single MIDX, and another > which calls the former in a loop over all MIDXs. > > This approach does not require that we change any of the implementation > in what is now `midx_contains_pack_1()` as it still operates over a > single MIDX. Makes sense. There is no ordering or relationship for which packs might be in which midx, so we have to just walk them linearly and check each part of the chain. -Peff
