Elijah Newren writes:
> I thought about that briefly yesterday, but the fact that the
> write_locked_index() call only happens if !cache_tree_fully_valid()
> meant refactoring slightly more to get the helper to also return that
> boolean value, and since I was a little unsure of myself with
> cac
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 1:11 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> Elijah Newren writes:
>
> > diff --git a/cache-tree.c b/cache-tree.c
> > index 706ffcf188..99144b1704 100644
> > --- a/cache-tree.c
> > +++ b/cache-tree.c
> > @@ -613,14 +613,19 @@ int write_index_as_tree(struct object_id *oid, struct
> >
Elijah Newren writes:
> diff --git a/cache-tree.c b/cache-tree.c
> index 706ffcf188..99144b1704 100644
> --- a/cache-tree.c
> +++ b/cache-tree.c
> @@ -613,14 +613,19 @@ int write_index_as_tree(struct object_id *oid, struct
> index_state *index_state,
> int entries, was_valid;
> struc
write_tree_from_memory() appeared to be a merge-recursive special that
basically duplicated write_index_as_tree(). The two had a slightly
different call structure but the big difference was just that
write_index_as_tree() would always unconditionally read the index off of
disk instead of working o
4 matches
Mail list logo
