On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 06:16:32PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote: > On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 10:09:53AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > Callers have no trivial way to obtain the newly created object database > > source when adding it to the in-memory list of alternates. While not yet > > needed anywhere, a subsequent commit will want to obtain that pointer. > > > > Refactor the function to return the source to make it easily accessible. > > > > Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> > > --- > > odb.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------- > > odb.h | 4 ++-- > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/odb.c b/odb.c > > index 61104b7cb8..7793816f81 100644 > > --- a/odb.c > > +++ b/odb.c > > @@ -139,23 +139,22 @@ static void read_info_alternates(struct object_database *odb, > > const char *relative_base, > > int depth); > > > > -static int link_alt_odb_entry(struct object_database *odb, > > - const struct strbuf *entry, > > - const char *relative_base, > > - int depth, > > - const char *normalized_objdir) > > +static struct odb_source *link_alt_odb_entry(struct object_database *odb, > > + const char *entry, > > + const char *relative_base, > > + int depth, > > + const char *normalized_objdir) > > Beyond returning an odb_source pointer from this function, it looks like > "entry" was changed form a strbuf to a bare const char *. Is that > intentional? If so, it might be worth mentioning it in the commit > message, or optionally doing that as a preparatory step. Done now. > > @@ -316,17 +315,23 @@ void odb_add_to_alternates_file(struct object_database *odb, > > free(alts); > > } > > > > -void odb_add_to_alternates_memory(struct object_database *odb, > > - const char *reference) > > +struct odb_source *odb_add_to_alternates_memory(struct object_database *odb, > > + const char *reference) > > Not the fault of your patch, but while we're refactoring, do you think > it makes sense to rename the second parameter here to "dir", or changing > "dir" to "reference" in the declaration of this function over in odb.h? Ah, these are inconsistent indeed, good catch. Will fix. Patrick
