On Tue, Sep 27 2022, Phillip Wood wrote:
On 27/09/2022 14:50, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Sep 27 2022, Phillip Wood wrote:
quoted
On 23/09/2022 19:55, Stefan Xenos via GitGitGadget wrote:
quoted
From: Stefan Xenos <redacted>
A change table stores a list of changes, and supports efficient
lookup
from a commit hash to the list of changes that reference that commit
directly.
It can be used to look up content commits or metacommits at the head
of a change, but does not support lookup of commits referenced as part
of the commit history.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Xenos <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Chris Poucet <redacted>
quoted
diff --git a/change-table.h b/change-table.h
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..166b5ed8073
--- /dev/null
+++ b/change-table.h
@@ -0,0 +1,132 @@
+#ifndef CHANGE_TABLE_H
+#define CHANGE_TABLE_H
+
+#include "oidmap.h"
+
+struct commit;
+struct ref_filter;
+
+/**
We tend to just use '/*' rather than '/**'
No, we use both, and /** is correct here. It's an API-doc syntax,
see
e.g. strbuf.h.
It's explicitly meant for this sort of thing, i.e. comments on
public
structs in a header & the functions in a header (and struct members,
etc.).
We don't do that consistently, we don't mention them in
CodingGuidelines and we don't use anything that processes API-doc
comments. It would be a lot simpler and it would be consistent with
our coding guidelines just to use the same style everywhere. That
would avoid problems where this series uses API-doc comments for
in-code comments in .c files and where single line comments in header
files do not use the API-doc syntax.
Yes, this isn't documented in CodingGuidelines (but FWIW is in various
commit messages).
I'm pointing out that this isn't a mistake, but the preferred style for
new API docs.
At least Emacs knows how to highlight these differently, which is the
main use I personally get out of them, I don't know what other use-cases
there are for them...