Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] index_has_changes(): avoid assuming operating on the_index

Elijah Newren [off-list ref] writes:

Modify index_has_changes() to take a struct istate* instead of just
operating on the_index.  This is only a partial conversion, though,
because we call do_diff_cache() which implicitly assumes work is to be
done on the_index.  Ongoing work is being done elsewhere to do the
remainder of the conversion, and thus is not duplicated here.  Instead,
a simple check is put in place until that work is complete.

Yeah, that is an unfortunate but necessary compromise until we
create do_diff_index() that can take an istate, and optionally turn
do_diff_cache() into

    #define do_diff_cache(...) do_diff_index(&the_index, ...)

if there are many callers that want to work on the default in-core
istate.