Re: [PATCH v6 5/6] bisect--helper: reimplement `bisect_run` shell

"Miriam R." [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

However, I still don't like that we play such a `dup2()` game. I gave it a
quick try to avoid it (see the diff below, which corresponds to the commit
I pushed up as `git-bisect-work-part4-v7` to
https://github.com/dscho/git), which still could benefit from a bit of
polishing (maybe we should rethink the object model and extend/rename
`bisect_terms` to `bisect_state` and accumulate more fields, such as
`out_fd`.

Obviously this will need to be cleaned up, and while I would _love_ to see
this make it into your next iteration, ultimately it is up to you, Miriam,
to decide whether you want to build on my diff (quite possibly making the
entire object model of the bisect part of Git's code more elegant and more
maintainable), and up to you, Junio, to decide whether you would be
willing to accept the patch series without this refactoring.

If the code paths involved are shallow and narrow enough that not
too many existing callers need to start passing FILE *stdout down
(from the looks of your illustration patch, it does not seem to be
too bad), I do not mind a series that is a bit longer than the
current 6-patch series that has a preliminary enhancement step that
allows callers to pass their own "FILE *" for output destination
before the main part of the topic.

Thanks.