From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B32BF1F910 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 12:00:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="HfF3BsZI"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231255AbiKUMAR (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2022 07:00:17 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58236 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231327AbiKUMAJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2022 07:00:09 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-x102b.google.com (mail-pj1-x102b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E9E7748C5 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 04:00:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x102b.google.com with SMTP id u6-20020a17090a5e4600b0021881a8d264so8739378pji.4 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 04:00:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=UmwDBDiY6QNAXJf4a/Zr+AQ4b+xMVV3KgrRw2UGeEWI=; b=HfF3BsZIJMwyssNp2049VWIkepjeeXDoaIG8tmQkgg7dHouZGJMUW23DSgFZDtJ1sm R759xVjGzFXMHgQHRHTtx+WaQpFqBXfxTQ1mhyOI2KSYVEqpOcqX+mO/OKTOXmkM9MyV ui1HpWhiRqCxiAIJVUox2tkj5sttsuTcWlxajqUHX22RO9YG5C5X5x3V2JGIuymnhVuY 380Mdzp4AKeKYPPYnwPNEjF+DWocQD44lXojLjUQxIHw+i0D0+UJp5jNOU+YlHA6wYMS Og/WB4rQbbyQtYYKSTWDRF7TeGv74jGJlZvF02uuDjD2KO5RqgdtYOG0bsyS4opmBgPH QDvg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=UmwDBDiY6QNAXJf4a/Zr+AQ4b+xMVV3KgrRw2UGeEWI=; b=XhZvdNV1xeNWW7wX6FTYdVY5D/9c9FNpUrQzCULAkszUWhsymWU7P1c2pCsB9vNLiz bBpBbknYFY3rO3I7bo6EXJCbkd02Z+FqQhptseBV8At+ycr4a9esIpdhk2jJpv+JZ1/e 0P7XHNcNiXCxyX2V6y5cbVkJdQ8bmtvJFGBFsiCv63VAUjdZWaDqfbygh1K4bz6a5yFV DEsK535ES46Tedd/y903zqaNQthKk2gkN8RJgtG7a1gn/Rg/Vy2YtVmZ2AmxHJhS5LYn LRG1XLLqD1e5nI/08rTEUx5lJp3jde2TwGiUA9e33OFo1+06n7hG1bubcly3k04ddvvO 1SPw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pk5qAopAlAJaWiFgR6UsGW3iMYiH5zYq5ZDvO30INzB5lrHF3GO VgV1wpyVcORsU1BLAyk0/E0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf7ZSHZKzpScUGVdZ30LLYp5DkauJId66S1ZQEKGUGricLlgApwdlOBcIY5YUMd+OMpNrCGhdQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b20f:b0:188:d4ea:251f with SMTP id t15-20020a170902b20f00b00188d4ea251fmr11455360plr.36.1669032007834; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 04:00:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([47.246.101.53]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h72-20020a62834b000000b0056bd1bf4243sm8552468pfe.53.2022.11.21.04.00.05 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 21 Nov 2022 04:00:07 -0800 (PST) From: Teng Long X-Google-Original-From: Teng Long To: avarab@gmail.com Cc: dyroneteng@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org, me@ttaylorr.com Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/4] ls-tree: pass state in struct, not globals Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 20:00:01 +0800 Message-Id: <20221121120001.5466-1-tenglong.tl@alibaba-inc.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.38.1.383.g9d5a491887b In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" write: > These are patches I've been carrying locally since April-ish, as a > follow-up to the "ls-tree --format" topic. Cool. > Teng: This conflicts with your topic, but re my suggestion of > submitting a separate clean-up series in [2] maybe you could look this > over, see how they differ from yours, and see what would make sense to > keep/incorporate for such a clean-up series? Yes, I'd like to. > E.g. 1/4 here is the opposite approach of your 3/6[3], but as 3/4 > eventually shows we don't need that struct for anything except that > callback case. Ok, I will check it out later. Thanks.