From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EEC620984 for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 23:32:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758428AbcIMXcW (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Sep 2016 19:32:22 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:61545 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754521AbcIMXcV (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Sep 2016 19:32:21 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD713F26C; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 19:32:19 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=BugrHZAol2L9BY7ns/F65Fa3JFU=; b=DgzUKn t5Ehgoq+OAkuwOI0gMr2jF9uB7jifEL0qpnEHqGCElLHWvBP3vDtx1XYz/GNfxNo K7eYGZlYye4LJMASM2prS1hrD5P8bO9cBVCIwtfWkwOIugSi+vBt1AyXgp77kemW uR/GhNmsEJj7rzJQ9nOSSefsMulqvK7Q0COjQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=IZA97+7ZZY5MJdc5DhO687CS4+vQ7OMQ Siq5Kc7GnxhL/nKBLUnu4QSnzoPcNkZ6oVbTXKULFngYouqbrtb4r/Nbg5f9+RRc sx2HXCbvNrsLdceZPpRw7Z3gjaEpYfoE+lFVIG4PcM8XTochQEMLY1iyiUPVscTu cSpnFNtgHL0= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D79203F26B; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 19:32:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5A8D33F26A; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 19:32:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Stefan Beller Cc: Jeff King , Christian Couder , "git\@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 16/17] diff: buffer output in emit_line_0 References: <20160913044613.1037-1-sbeller@google.com> <20160913044613.1037-17-sbeller@google.com> Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 16:32:17 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Beller's message of "Tue, 13 Sep 2016 16:28:06 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 501F2554-7A0A-11E6-A602-F7BB12518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Stefan Beller writes: > So would we rather want to keep the ecbdata around for each file pair and > just reference that? I thought we deliberately want to avoid ecbdata, so maybe > we rather want to have another struct that keeps path related information > around (pointer to the blob and white space information). I would expect that there would be two structs, one per path "struct buffered_patch" that has the per-path thing, and another per line "struct buffered_patch_line" that describes what each line is, and has a pointer to the former.