Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes:
>>
>>> So how would you find out when we are done?
>>
>> while (1) {
>> if (we have available slot)
>> ask to start a new one;
>> if (nobody is running anymore)
>> break;
>> collect the output from running ones;
>> drain the output from the foreground one;
>> cull the finished process;
>> }
>>
>
> Personally I do not like the break; in the middle of
> the loop, but that's personal preference, I'd guess.
> I'll also move the condition for (we have available slot)
> back inside the called function.
>
> So I am thinking about using this in the reroll instead:
>
> run_processes_parallel_start_as_needed(&pp);
> while (pp.nr_processes > 0) {
> run_processes_parallel_buffer_stderr(&pp);
> run_processes_parallel_output(&pp);
> run_processes_parallel_collect_finished(&pp);
> run_processes_parallel_start_as_needed(&pp);
> }
If you truly think the latter is easier to follow its logic (with
the duplicated call to the same function only to avoid break that
makes it clear why we are quitting the loop, and without the
explicit "start only if we can afford to"), then I have to say that
our design tastes are fundamentally incompatible. I have nothing
more to add.
--
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
