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=-3.9 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 9D818202A0 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2017 02:14:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755529AbdKQCOQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:14:16 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:63319 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754930AbdKQCOP (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:14:15 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEB3DB9B7D; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:14:14 -0500 (EST) 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=j2MUQtOb74lNYQavbuyUCXi7S3A=; b=gHWHJy xUPplwYm+D6uQmht44AYYw5IfQtHcH8trB8j/xuJx+AhhxFmH5hprfR5dwcLxiiC unFUGscD41LMN91UzYoSUmj+MOsnGrLajP+ldAfMg/HbtfZiqVrNk3NHlr/EWpN/ zInDSB5PPhFr/i4yZDWr3zsQvrjocrodtyscA= 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=IWQrvihi40V4ou9e9u/Zv09Ah/2loKyy U2ql2nigDvfyX5y4/Y7ztDUo90msn9Nvs95CRfkiYA0p6ETcHyI1K4TA5IOQEyEd 3f5Q1G4FuO6zVS7rjCu4o9EZ/Cg1IKGHjlaqD7Y8IcoWPvXcBefVq0y/wuR+fsDc Px1lg9DOfyY= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C613BB9B7C; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:14:14 -0500 (EST) 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 2BEC8B9B7A; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:14:14 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Jeff Hostetler , Jonathan Tan , git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Hostetler Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] list-objects: filter objects in traverse_commit_list References: <20171116180743.61353-1-git@jeffhostetler.com> <20171116180743.61353-5-git@jeffhostetler.com> <20171116122133.4cc718414579c1a5a682174b@google.com> <20171116215725.k44e3alk2lq6bbwu@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 11:14:13 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20171116215725.k44e3alk2lq6bbwu@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 16 Nov 2017 16:57:26 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 01DA2FB2-CB3D-11E7-BC73-8EF31968708C-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > Those encodings don't necessarily need to be the same, because they're > about transport. Inside each process we'd have the raw bytes, and encode > them as appropriate to whatever sub-program we're going to pass to (or > not at all if we skip the shell for sub-processes, which is usually a > good idea). Yes, I share the same feeling. It does not help that the series defines its own notion of arg_needs_armor() and uses it to set a field called requires_armor that is not yet used, the definition of "armor"ing being each byte getting encoded as two hexadecimal digits without any sign (which makes me wonder what a receiver of "deadbeef" would do---did it receive an armored string or a plain one???). I do not understand why these strings are not passed as opaque sequences of bytes and instead converted at this low a layer.