Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] commit: make 'commit_graft_pos' non-static

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:

> -static int commit_graft_pos(struct repository *r, const unsigned char *sha1)
> +int commit_graft_pos(struct repository *r, const unsigned char *sha1)
>  {
>  	return sha1_pos(sha1, r->parsed_objects->grafts,
>  			r->parsed_objects->grafts_nr,
> diff --git a/commit.h b/commit.h
> index ab91d21131..eb42e8b6d2 100644
> --- a/commit.h
> +++ b/commit.h
> @@ -236,6 +236,7 @@ struct commit_graft {
>  typedef int (*each_commit_graft_fn)(const struct commit_graft *, void *);
>  
>  struct commit_graft *read_graft_line(struct strbuf *line);
> +int commit_graft_pos(struct repository *r, const unsigned char *sha1);

In an earlier exchange, I saw this:

>> - could include a comment saying that it's an index into
>>   r->parsed_objects->grafts
>
> This and the below are both good ideas to me. I prefer this one, since
> we'd have to duplicate yet another static function
> ('commit_graft_sha1_access()' directly above) that is called by this
> one.
>
>> - I'm usually loathe to suggest unnecessary duplication of code, but
>>   it might make sense to duplicate the function into shallow.c.  Or
>>   even to inline it there (in the single call site, that ends up
>>   being pretty readable).
>
> I am not at all offended by duplication of code where it makes sense to
> do so, but having to duplicate two functions seems like we'd be better
> off simply documenting the function in commit.h.

and I think I agree with that direction.  Forgot to add those
comments?