Re: [PATCH 0/23] parsing and fsck cleanups

[Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>]

I've looked at the rest of the patch set and I think that this set is
worth taking.

>     This a string of refactors that ends up with all of the
>     type-specific fsck functions not getting an object struct at all.
>     My goal there was two-fold:
> 
>        - it makes it harder to introduce weirdness like we saw in
> 	 patches 5-8.
> 
>        - it _could_ make things less awkward for callers like index-pack
> 	 which don't necessarily have object structs. And at the end, we
> 	 basically have an fsck_object() that doesn't need an object
> 	 struct. But index-pack still calls fsck_walk(), which does (and
> 	 which relies on the parsed values to traverse). It's not
> 	 entirely clear to me whether index-pack needs to be doing
> 	 fsck_walk() in the first place, or if it should be relying on
> 	 the usual connectivity check.
> 
> 	 So I'm undecided whether this is worth taking on its own, or if
> 	 trying to avoid object structs in the fsck code is just a
> 	 fool's errand. I do think the result isn't too bad to look at,
> 	 though and there are some minor improvements along the way
> 	 (e.g., patch 17 is able to drop some awkwardness).

If we can partially avoid object structs in the fsck code, I think
that's an improvement too.