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=-6.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, LIST_MIRROR_RECEIVED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_CSS,URIBL_CSS_A, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL shortcircuit=no autolearn=no 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 BB3431F852 for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2022 18:33:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1353520AbiBCSdP (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Feb 2022 13:33:15 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58992 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231788AbiBCSdP (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Feb 2022 13:33:15 -0500 Received: from mail-ua1-x929.google.com (mail-ua1-x929.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::929]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0F06C061714 for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2022 10:33:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ua1-x929.google.com with SMTP id w21so6770119uan.7 for ; Thu, 03 Feb 2022 10:33:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4vF2Sl2r9JXy+SGWlgTi5M781OCbeD2o3XztMZi7/ys=; b=FOYlxNgKEGy85qI0t8kxftPlTVn8B5WvNK9QRJOXUQ/5O6fu0O+XUdxCBb62uCjDKc gUEu2+u2AU30f44t+dPzM7zAxnHUPL5a9eKYgopAcaFw9bzebGB9qFxYdBQbG9AsgsgA 2RNua6iPZ1f7LxYOpT04lZr4fmpVsOShkQhB0RJcOBHTz5cT9RZ/UnzlWUJEKkGereHX W3dxAg8c8s9zZdHpJwHAKvOr4vy/jygiNEUoGOQZkn+e3OUGzQb6GzY9+Inc9YK797Ar WhZEW9K5LIygw3lAmXGfoSDj4HCgeNHgb/pKkFnxkYV/ijn7wIOTqfnR8qBq2ofRUSWb mgbA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4vF2Sl2r9JXy+SGWlgTi5M781OCbeD2o3XztMZi7/ys=; b=n0A4eovI9pNuYam7Aym2QLFkfDyISGvrX8rCNToTD0V86Eeyb/FGQJlUtE2D9e1Uxo daKC7u4AmWQKGHQScao8d0xnivIZClMOqzq8p+iNG8o4TFpolvsVIIPoHHbgE8Sfrnyh o3iD5MAaGy59yMTHRACHiGdUVYhFjT7rNP7Z7s7lRyXpS5WLh4+VjtpF6zysqNEkSpKd inylPjSeUAv3icWn2iOvlU8FPkT44hv/Dqch7FjPXicQ8Ueqb7yIOu75GyK0GXMBm+cg wFwqHt//s9CYTPUiamCymcJzBhtpICi8ML28RZg7+SrzaAmLmU1+CdW3CColhVJ7G6Zf QXkw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533BgxirfNYg08rZOPT+kBnDdyZm501TnFS6bRAMEKWr2TOPKV+e TehqoGfUA1u6ahesdKLkrmMIgxJZTeFPa6CVX5VNRTp7uHk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy5eti27D5REkBtbNiDm+byQYzuLS561xZzyk1Rg9kZvqUhW25S4+O8/ODsmYTkB+0cb3rm4/RQuuqT0aqZ7dk= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:2a07:: with SMTP id o7mr14944826uar.39.1643913193964; Thu, 03 Feb 2022 10:33:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <220201.86ilty9vq2.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> <220203.8635kz6d2o.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Han-Wen Nienhuys Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2022 19:33:02 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] refs.h: make all flags arguments unsigned To: Junio C Hamano Cc: =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= , Han-Wen Nienhuys via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Han-Wen Nienhuys Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 7:27 PM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Yes, enums or not, what I was also pointing out in > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/220201.86ilty9vq2.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com= / > > is that changing just one logical set of flags at a time would make thi= s > > much easier to review. > > Another thing to consider is how to make this play better with other > topics in flight. Basing a huge single patch on top of 'seen' is a > way to ensure that the patch will never be useful. There won't be a > good time when such a topic can graduate. The topic will also have > a hard time keeping up with what new topics add while waiting for > what happen to be in 'seen' today (some of which may even go away > without graduating) all graduate. > > Limiting the scope to small and more stable subset of flags that are > in 'master' and does not conflict (e.g. no new bit defined to the > set of flags, no existing bit gets removed, no new callers that use > the bitset introduced) with other topics would incrementally improve > the code base, and makes progress in the sense that it reduces the > remaining work. OK. But do we agree we want to use enums? Me and AEvar are in favor, anyone against? --=20 Han-Wen Nienhuys - Google Munich I work 80%. Don't expect answers from me on Fridays. -- Google Germany GmbH, Erika-Mann-Strasse 33, 80636 Munich Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg Gesch=C3=A4ftsf=C3=BChrer: Paul Manicle, Halimah DeLaine Prado