On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 3:27 AM, Duy Nguyen <pclo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 8:36 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: >> Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes: >> >>> This applies to origin/master. >>> >>> For better readability and understandability for newcomers it is a good idea >>> to not offer 2 APIs doing the same thing with on being the #define of the >>> other. >>> >>> In the long run we may want to drop the macros guarded by >>> NO_THE_INDEX_COMPATIBILITY_MACROS. This converts a couple of them. >> >> Why? > > Well.. why did you add NO_THE_INDEX_COMP... in the first place? ;-) j/k > >> Why should we keep typing &the_index, when most of the time we are given >> _the_ index and working on it? > > I attempted the same thing once or twice in the past, had the same > impression and dropped it. But I think it's good to get rid of cache_* > macros, at least outside builtin/ directory. It makes it clearer about > the index dependency. Maybe one day we could libify sha1_file.c and > finally introduce "struct repository", where the_index, object db and > ref-store belong (hmm.. the index may belong to "struct worktree", not > the repo one...).
+cc Brandon, who attempts to come up with a struct repository as we speak. > So yeah it may look a bit more verbose (and probably causes a lot more > conflicts on 'pu') but in my opinion it's a good direction. I wish > Stefan good luck. Brave soul :D Thanks for the encouragement! As you seem to be interested in this topic, you may want to help out by reviewing, starting at: https://public-inbox.org/git/20170502222322.21055-1-sbel...@google.com/ Thanks, Stefan
