Re: [PATCH 1/2] connected: allow supplying different view of reachable objects

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

> diff --git a/connected.c b/connected.c
> index 74a20cb32e..2a4c4e0025 100644
> --- a/connected.c
> +++ b/connected.c
> @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ int check_connected(oid_iterate_fn fn, void *cb_data,
>  	strvec_push(&rev_list.args, "--stdin");
>  	if (has_promisor_remote())
>  		strvec_push(&rev_list.args, "--exclude-promisor-objects");
> -	if (!opt->is_deepening_fetch) {
> +	if (!opt->is_deepening_fetch && !opt->reachable_oids_fn) {
>  		strvec_push(&rev_list.args, "--not");
>  		strvec_push(&rev_list.args, "--all");
>  	}
> @@ -125,6 +125,13 @@ int check_connected(oid_iterate_fn fn, void *cb_data,
>  
>  	rev_list_in = xfdopen(rev_list.in, "w");
>  
> +	if (opt->reachable_oids_fn) {
> +		const struct object_id *reachable_oid;
> +		while ((reachable_oid = opt->reachable_oids_fn(opt->reachable_oids_data)) != NULL)
> +			if (fprintf(rev_list_in, "^%s\n", oid_to_hex(reachable_oid)) < 0)
> +				break;
> +	}

It is good that these individual negative references are fed from
the standard input, not on the command line, as they can be many.

In the original code without the reachable_oids_fn, we refrain from
excluding when the is_deepening_fetch bit is set, but here we do not
pay attention to the bit at all.  Is that sensible, and if so why?