Re: [PATCH] defer expensive load_ref_decorations until needed

[Phil Hord <phil.hord@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>
> I am not sure if "maybe_" is a good name here, though.  If anything,
> you are making the semantics of "load_ref_decorations()" to "maybe"
> (but I do not suggest renaming that one).
>
> How about calling it to load_ref_decorations_lazily() or something?

I groped about for something conventional, but "..._gently" didn't fit
the bill, so I went with "maybe".  I like "lazily" better for this
case. I will change it for v2.

>> Other than that, I like what this patch attempts to do.  A nicely
>> identified low-hanging fruit ;-).
>
> Having said that, this will have a bad interaction with another
> topic in flight: <20171121213341.13939-1-rafa.almas@gmail.com>
>
> Perhaps this should wait until the other topic lands and stabilizes.
> We'd need to rethink if the approach taken by this patch, i.e. to
> still pass the info to load() but holding onto it until the time
> lazy_load() actually uses it, is a sensible way forward, or we would
> want to change the calling convention to help making it easier to
> implement the lazy loading.

I noticed that after just after cleaning this one up, but didn't look
closely yet.  I'll hold this in my local queue until ra lands.

P