Re: [PATCH] midx: traverse the local MIDX first

[Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>]

On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 03:03:09PM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> On 8/28/2020 2:55 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 02:50:39PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> >
> >> So I'd be tempted to say that the latter callers should be using a
> >> separate function that gives them what they want. That lets them avoid
> >> being too intimate with the details of how we order things.
> >>
> >> The patch below illustrates that.  It also changes the existing function
> >> name to avoid confusion and to help audit the existing callers, but
> >> that's optional and maybe not worth it.
> >
> > And here's the same concept as a more minimal change, suitable for
> > squashing into yours. The advantage is that it keeps the "the local one
> > goes first" logic in one abstracted spot.
>
> This is nice because it is more future-proof: if we needed to
> change the order of the midx list, then we could update the
> implementation of this method instead of every caller.
>
> Personally, I prefer this one (squashed).

Ditto. Peff and I crossed emails, so I was talking about tidying up his
earlier patch before I even had seen the second one.

Peff -- any objections to me squashing this into mine and sending that
for queueing?

> Thanks,
> -Stolee

Thanks,
Taylor