Duy Nguyen writes:
>> That is an approach to make it harder to make mistakes by accepting
>> possibly a small wasted resource; but at that point, I think calling
>> repo_read_index() unconditionally from here and similar places would
>> be a simpler fix in the same spirit.
>
> For repo_read_index
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:16 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> Jeff King writes:
>
> > Also from my earlier message, if you missed it:
> >
> > I also wondered if we should simply allocate an empty index whenever
> > we have a non-toplevel "struct repository", which might be less
> > surprising
Jeff King writes:
> Also from my earlier message, if you missed it:
>
> I also wondered if we should simply allocate an empty index whenever
> we have a non-toplevel "struct repository", which might be less
> surprising to other callers. I don't have a strong opinion either way.
> I did g
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 08:24:34AM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 8:54 PM Jeff King wrote:
> > diff --git a/sha1-name.c b/sha1-name.c
> > index 775a73d8ad..455e9fb1ea 100644
> > --- a/sha1-name.c
> > +++ b/sha1-name.c
> > @@ -1837,7 +1837,7 @@ static enum get_oid_result
> > g
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 8:54 PM Jeff King wrote:
> diff --git a/sha1-name.c b/sha1-name.c
> index 775a73d8ad..455e9fb1ea 100644
> --- a/sha1-name.c
> +++ b/sha1-name.c
> @@ -1837,7 +1837,7 @@ static enum get_oid_result
> get_oid_with_context_1(struct repository *repo,
> if (flags
Jeff King wrote:
> +++ b/sha1-name.c
> @@ -1837,7 +1837,7 @@ static enum get_oid_result
> get_oid_with_context_1(struct repository *repo,
> if (flags & GET_OID_RECORD_PATH)
> oc->path = xstrdup(cp);
>
> - if (!repo->index->cache)
> + i
just a silly mistake in the code to
check whether the index is already initialized.
Once we fix that, we don't need to handle this specifically in the
submodule code. So here's a simpler, revised patch:
-- >8 --
Subject: [PATCH] get_oid: handle NULL repo->index
When get_oid() and its hel
7 matches
Mail list logo
