On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 07:05:05PM +0200, Jakub Narebski wrote: > Dnia piątek 18. lipca 2008 18:48, Petr Baudis napisał: > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 12:19:31AM +0200, Lea Wiemann wrote: > > > > No, you should never pass in an invalid SHA1 in the first place. The > > > above piece of documentation is just a warning that bugs will show up > > > delayed. IOW, this is not the right place to have your error handling. > > > > > > If you're getting a SHA1 through the user-interface, check its existence > > > with get_sha1 before passing it to the constructor. > > > > But that's an expensive operation, you need extra Git exec for this, > > while all the Git commands can do the checks for you, if you give them > > the chance. > > > > I was doing pretty much this thing in Cogito (initially out of > > necessity) and it made it ungodly slow for any kind of batch operations. > > Lea probably would point out that thanks to '--batch-check' option > to git-cat-file, and "reuse => 1" option to ->get_bidi_pipe you would > need only one extra Git exec... BUT it is one extra Git exec per > entire Perl script (one per request, for example, for gitweb). > And it wouldn't help batching Perl script commands. Even so, I don't like this restriction simply since it makes the usage more complicated - in my commandline tool, I will be forced to write my $csha1 = $repo->get_sha1($ARGV[0]); $csha1 or die "a random inconsistent error message"; $repo->get_commit($csha1) instead of $repo->get_commit($ARGV[0]) # die if unresolved and I don't understand why. Me and 80% of the scripts don't *care* about some more graceful error handling, and if gitweb and the other 20% (or less) do, *they* should do the extra work, not me. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis As in certain cults it is possible to kill a process if you know its true name. -- Ken Thompson and Dennis M. Ritchie -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
