git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: David Turner <dturner@twopensource.com>
To: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>,
	git discussion list <git@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Subject: Re: RFC: New reference iteration paradigm
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 16:15:37 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1459455337.2976.36.camel@twopensource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56FD4CAD.3070100@alum.mit.edu>

On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 18:13 +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> Currently the way to iterate over references is via a family of
> for_each_ref()-style functions. You pass some arguments plus a
> callback
> function and cb_data to the function, and your callback is called for
> each reference that is selected.
> 
> This works, but it has two big disadvantages:
> 
> 1. It is cumbersome for callers. The caller's logic has to be split
>    into two functions, the one that calls for_each_ref() and the
>    callback function. Any data that have to be passed between the
>    functions has to be stuck in a separate data structure.
> 
> 2. This interface is not composable. For example, you can't write a
>    single function that iterates over references from two sources,
>    as is interesting for combining packed plus loose references,
>    shared plus worktree-specific references, symbolic plus normal
>    references, etc. The current code for combining packed and loose
>    references needs to walk the two reference trees in lockstep,
>    using intimate knowledge about how references are stored [1,2,3].
> 
> I'm currently working on a patch series to transition the reference
> code
> from using for_each_ref()-style iteration to using proper iterators.
> 
> The main point of this change is to change the base iteration
> paradigm
> that has to be supported by reference backends. So instead of
> 
> > int do_for_each_ref_fn(const char *submodule, const char *base,
> >                        each_ref_fn fn, int trim, int flags,
> >                        void *cb_data);
> 
> the backend now has to implement
> 
> > struct ref_iterator *ref_iterator_begin_fn(const char *submodule,
> >                                            const char *prefix,
> >                                            unsigned int flags);
> 
> The ref_iterator itself has to implement two main methods:
> 
> > int iterator_advance_fn(struct ref_iterator *ref_iterator);
> > void iterator_free_fn(struct ref_iterator *ref_iterator);
> 
> A loop over references now looks something like
> 
> > struct ref_iterator *iter = each_ref_in_iterator("refs/tags/");
> > while (ref_iterator_advance(iter)) {
> >         /* code using iter->refname, iter->oid, iter->flags */
> > }
> 
> I built quite a bit of ref_iterator infrastructure to make it easy to
> plug things together quite flexibly. For example, there is an
> overlay_ref_iterator which takes two other iterators (e.g., one for
> packed and one for loose refs) and overlays them, presenting the
> result
> via the same iterator interface. But the same overlay_ref_iterator
> can
> be used to overlay any two other iterators on top of each other.

I haven't looked at the code yet, but this makes sense to me.  In
general, the major reason to supply a callback style of API is when
iteration is more complicated than whatever will be consuming the data
(I can't remember where I heard this argument, but I found it pretty
convincing).  It seems like this is increasingly not the case, so we
should move towards the iterator style.

      parent reply	other threads:[~2016-03-31 20:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-31 16:13 RFC: New reference iteration paradigm Michael Haggerty
2016-03-31 18:01 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-03-31 19:31   ` Jeff King
2016-03-31 20:08     ` Junio C Hamano
2018-05-26 17:25     ` Jakub Narebski
2018-05-29 16:52       ` Jeff King
2016-03-31 20:15 ` David Turner [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1459455337.2976.36.camel@twopensource.com \
    --to=dturner@twopensource.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).