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-Status: No, score=-3.6 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_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A6861F4B4 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:33:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2391687AbgJOTde (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2020 15:33:34 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48036 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727698AbgJOTde (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2020 15:33:34 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-x244.google.com (mail-oi1-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::244]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50C12C061755 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:33:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-x244.google.com with SMTP id s81so4303572oie.13 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:33:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xzTw/3rPf8algxj6xrAaoLMe0P2kZWKVoSQszm5bevU=; b=jUxEwy5pBll4DIStEcos2s9f49ZVccciNJD+7dBnVmfI9Q3NdFltXs2x+oWoQRTqCE VqAX4kYvxSohvkKk28m/PlFxqlRWcCKOdjkwyvqb3RZaUXNEbfu+U8KijKKFt8sAfBqT uyF1PJ+Do/KD84koS7petNqvTb3sh1TJT5ER5pEi7uVB1Fx4vdVApdPiFBOPiaGLNrHF 2J4kJ8HYd+p9K2+9A32UTQJlXpN1sw2XFgyalnvKCK1NMx8dPNGMsg8kvK9a8DLiCEiv bZCnWA7kqmZQ9RTxE+q6MqULn0JvqddtjT+BTyMR2RSK7JIOMdPbYOrHICRU5oprkR+Y MBjw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xzTw/3rPf8algxj6xrAaoLMe0P2kZWKVoSQszm5bevU=; b=cW5dtONxZsumvW4EaVDAhyNdZb1uWH9Ht9ycBDWD6xwRszFA8ny7nw4PYrCmvsIo+g LhCHfUnX7ld7U7NrtW6ZiogTgvUWOinypV/kZU366eAvd2bfT5KQASqYj3UWO5Wyh4se GiFDED71OGRf1HQpPpubgIEy7KeEAw4H9jE0bbl43Ca10smHofEg2PD3BJPiGe118IUL QDwdLJfhbJVJqnP/kOeB+lWf8+xqcqnTTJb6mvisnJPeiNezEzkPHebUwa1hkiVdA9zR +f+jqer0NChY7iRkj5tgT/7aZP6krwXoJJ6zAan8oUesB4uGbwCJVvuEB1hGS0+v/gXP D7rw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530SL4uzIOv+mGSnVeZ1ZduHkZuTxRaojoNRW1SbWWQLMdm1S9xa SXFTGLyp3Hmdze3/fS0jfOKrq28skDPuJAs2nVU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxY99aP632IY6DtzX68yaBPaG78SOYS4tgNaOgHlWrJbvlcvz3+xp9EYmODXfcxhyBIPA8QvAoe1QHoEXq4+RU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:246:: with SMTP id m6mr14366oie.151.1602790413610; Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:33:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201015160725.GA1104947@coredump.intra.peff.net> In-Reply-To: From: Nipunn Koorapati Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 20:33:21 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] dir.c: fix comments to agree with argument name To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jeff King , Nipunn Koorapati via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Alex Vandiver Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Happy to update it to use the object based terminology, though I'm not sure how the desired final result differs from above. I believe I said "compute oid" in the comment - and it is all in one commit. gitgitgadget appears to have shown a range-diff from the previous iteration, but the latest iteration is still one commit. --Nipunn On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 7:41 PM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Jeff King writes: > > >> - * If "ss" is not NULL, compute SHA-1 of the exclude file and fill > >> + * If "oid_stat" is not NULL, compute SHA-1 of the exclude file and fill > > > > Makes sense. This changed as part of 4b33e60201 (dir: convert struct > > sha1_stat to use object_id, 2018-01-28). Perhaps it would likewise make > > sense to stop saying "SHA-1" here, and just say "hash" (or even "object > > id", though TBH I think the fact that the hash is the same as an > > object-id is largely an implementation detail). > > I do not quite get your "though TBH", though. I do agree with you > that it is an implementation detail that an object is named after > the hash of its contents, so saying "compute object name" probably > makes sense in more context than "compute hash" outside the narrow > parts of the code that actually implements how object names are > computed. So I would have expected "because TBH", not "though TBH". > > Anyway. Nipunn, can you fix both of them in the same commit, as > they are addressing a problem from the same cause (i.e. we are no > longer SHA-1 centric). > > Thanks.