On Mon, 2015-08-31 at 01:11 -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote: > Stepping back a bit, is a for-each-foo()-style interface desirable? > This sort of interface imposes a good deal of complexity on callers, > demanding a callback function and callback data (cb_data), and is > generally (at least in C) more difficult to reason about than other > simpler interfaces. Is such complexity warranted? > > An alternate, much simpler interface would be to have a function, say > get_worktrees(), return an array of 'worktree' structures to the > caller, which the caller would iterate over (which is a common > operation in C, thus easily reasoned about). > > The one benefit of a for-each-foo()-style interface is that it's > possible to "exit early", thus avoiding the cost of interrogating > meta-data for worktrees in which the caller is not interested, > however, it seems unlikely that there will be so many worktrees linked > to a repository for this early exit to translate into any real > savings.
The other benefit is that there is no need to worry about deallocating the list. But that might be too minor to worry about. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
