Re: Question about get_cached_commit_buffer()

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 01:48:11PM -0500, Jeff King wrote:

> > What confuses me about this behavior is that the OID is still shown on the
> > repeat (and in the case of `git log --oneline` will not actually have a line
> > break between two short-OIDs). I don't believe this behavior is something to
> > preserve.
> 
> I think that repeating the oid is intentional; the point is to dump how
> the traversal code is hitting the endpoints, even if we do so multiple
> times.
> 
> The --oneline behavior just looks like a bug. I think --format is broken
> with --show-all, too (it does not show anything!).

I poked at one of the examples a little more closely. I actually think
these are not repeats, but simply UNINTERESTING parents that we never
needed to look at in our traversal (because we hit a point where
everything was UNINTERESTING).

So we are relying not on finish_commit() to have freed the buffer, but
on the traversal code to have never parsed those commits in the first
place. Which is doubly subtle.

I think the rest of my email stands, though: we should just show the
full headers for those commits.

-Peff