From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59032C4332F for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 20:43:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229480AbiLNUnk (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Dec 2022 15:43:40 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43834 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229463AbiLNUnh (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Dec 2022 15:43:37 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [104.130.231.41]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D5C4EB3 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 12:43:36 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 28251 invoked by uid 109); 14 Dec 2022 20:43:36 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 20:43:36 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 22669 invoked by uid 111); 14 Dec 2022 20:43:36 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 15:43:36 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2022 15:43:35 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Jonathan Tan Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/4] Don't lazy-fetch commits when parsing them Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 11:17:39AM -0800, Jonathan Tan wrote: > Thanks everyone once again and sorry for the churn. Hopefully I got it > right this time. > > open_loose_object() is documented to return the path of the object > we found, so I think we already have that covered (if we detect that > an object is corrupt, it follows that we would already have found the > object in the first place). This version looks good to me. Thanks for your persistence. :) I think the end result is very nicely done. -Peff