"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> For now, replace the use of -1 with a 'NO_PREFERRED_PACK' macro and an
> equality check. The macro stores the max value of a uint32_t, so we
> cannot store a preferred pack that appears last in a list of 2^32 total
> packs, but that's expected to be unreasonable already. This improves the
> range from 2^31 already.
;-)
I very much like this change. An obvious alternative may be to use
int instead of uint32_t to number and index into in-core packs, as
we all know that not just 2^32 but 2^31 is still unreasonably too
many anyway.
> There are some careful things to worry about with initializing the
> preferred pack in the struct and using that value when searching for a
> preferred pack that was already incorrect but accidentally working when
> the index was initialized to zero.
True.
> - struct write_midx_context ctx = { 0 };
> + struct write_midx_context ctx = {
> + .preferred_pack_idx = NO_PREFERRED_PACK,
> + };
Good.
> if (preferred_pack_name) {
> - ctx.preferred_pack_idx = -1;
> + ctx.preferred_pack_idx = NO_PREFERRED_PACK;
This too.
Thanks.
