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=-4.1 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 55CBF1FA26 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 04:10:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751050AbdDREJx (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2017 00:09:53 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:52344 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750954AbdDREJv (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2017 00:09:51 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E7FE76044; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 00:09:50 -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=et/B7a4XEgEAMGTjKVG8/+Mmw0Y=; b=x8/6gm g9R0qn9LzRSRQl2FH6qv95J46w5+tGrquvBRI67JnK07XWlF/8x6dg6elSs3tBqo CZkL666nF1+TD47uoh//cPCvaT5wzUt8zD0jz1LHPqM8fNwOXylE5nW+tG4tkZ/Q YWTyDf3VByny5QGx5GfSuw89hUD0p8paYCik4= 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=fydCT9J8ML6/Pgb/EuhRe44Gdsu5t0Di 5Dsv5SOBqdoQ+Z8/e4y9E3zps8Dm2OgVY86q95x6fDDuGBwrlbOvBSDRA0hnq0C1 6usW1rHNOg9NO45TVmAO7PhEMdUiw44VvQUFnQbFZWzo7r4Lws5fENKzdsl+6ed3 K8LNZHVF/Mc= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 278C476043; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 00:09:50 -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-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 80D3176042; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 00:09:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Daniel Ferreira Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, sbeller@google.com, pclouds@gmail.com, mhagger@alum.mit.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/5] [GSoC] remove_subtree(): reimplement using iterators References: <1492462296-4990-1-git-send-email-bnmvco@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2017 21:09:48 -0700 In-Reply-To: <1492462296-4990-1-git-send-email-bnmvco@gmail.com> (Daniel Ferreira's message of "Mon, 17 Apr 2017 17:51:31 -0300") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: DD9D8FA6-23EC-11E7-A512-C260AE2156B6-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Daniel Ferreira writes: > I think this is the closest to a final version we've ever gotten. I > followed all of Michael and Stefan's suggestions on top of v8, and with > Michael's endorsement made dir_iterator_begin() return NULL and set > errno appropriately in case of an error. > > On second thought, maybe the extra code complexity required from > dir_iterator_begin()'s callers might be actually an advantage as > dir_iterator grows to tackle more complex dir traversing challenges on > Git. After all, we might want some special behavior depending on what > the given `path` is instead of always considering it valid and later > behaving as if it was an empty directory. > > Thanks again for the reviews. I had a bit of trouble with phrasing here and there, but other than that the series was a pleasant read overall. Will queue, anticipating "Yeah, this is good as the final version" comments from reviewers. Thanks.