From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, git@jeffhostetler.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fetch-pack: write effective filter to trace2
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2022 11:56:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqtu753tti.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqwncadwzh.fsf@gitster.g> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Mon, 18 Jul 2022 12:47:14 -0700")
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> writes:
>
>> +static void write_and_trace_filter(struct fetch_pack_args *args,
>> + struct strbuf *req_buf,
>> + int server_supports_filter)
>> +{
>> +...
>> +}
>
> The previous round already had the same issue, but this makes it
> even worse by introducing a function that makes it clear that it
> mixes quite unrelated two features (i.e. write the filter to the
> other end, which MUST be done for correct operation of the protocol,
> and write a log to trace2, which may not be even necessary when we
> are not logging at all).
> ...
> In a sense, we can say that the only purpose this helper function is
> to tell the server end what the filter we use is by renaming it; it
> is OK to have debugging statements and logging code as part of the
> implementation of such a function.
>
> I actually like that direction better. A helper function may exist
> *ONLY* to trace, in which case, having "trace" in its name would
> make perfect sense. A helper function may exist to perform the real
> work, but it may log what it did to perform the real work as well.
> I think the latter shouldn't have "trace" in its name at all, or our
> helpers will all be called do_FOO_and_trace(), do_BAR_and_debug(),
> etc., which is nonsense. Just calling do_FOO() and do_BAR(), and
> then having them log or trace as needed, is fine.
After waiting for a week, I still haven't seen any correction to
this patch, but do you want to give the helper function a bit more
sensible name in an updated patch, perhaps say "send_filter()" or
something?
Otherwise the topic looked good.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-25 18:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-15 17:29 [PATCH] fetch-pack: write effective filter to trace2 Jonathan Tan
2022-07-15 17:38 ` Jeff Hostetler
2022-07-15 18:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-07-15 19:09 ` Jonathan Tan
2022-07-15 20:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-07-15 20:49 ` Jonathan Tan
2022-07-18 14:08 ` Jeff Hostetler
2022-07-18 15:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-07-18 16:18 ` Jonathan Tan
2022-07-18 17:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-07-18 17:00 ` [PATCH v2] " Jonathan Tan
2022-07-18 19:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-07-25 18:56 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2022-07-26 16:28 ` Jonathan Tan
2022-07-26 16:27 ` [PATCH v3] " Jonathan Tan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqtu753tti.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@jeffhostetler.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).