Code review comment for lp:~bzr/bzr/faster-branch-notree

John A Meinel (jameinel) wrote :

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ian Clatworthy wrote:
>> I would really prefer not to fix it this way. It is coded this way
>> because we expect iter_references to be efficient. To make it efficient
>> with RevisionTrees, we just need to exit early when the underlying
>> repository doesn't support tree-references, as we already do with
>> WorkingTree4.
>
> Can you explain further and/or tweak the branch, time permitting? I'm not sure I see the advantage of what you're suggesting over exiting early in Tree.iter_references() and delegating supports_tree_reference() to RevisionTree as I'm doing. I don't particularly *like* how Tree.iter_references() is coded - it could use iter_just_entries() and only calculate paths when a tree reference is found instead - but I don't see the benefit in having a custom implementation of iter_references in RevisionTree. What am I missing?

I would guess he was voting on the earlier form, which had the 'if
supports_tree_reference' as part of BzrDir.sprout().

Obviously, Aaron needs to clarify.

John
=:->

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkoUDv8ACgkQJdeBCYSNAAMKtwCgl6W81HyZVyOmPKCnZB9JybBP
xj0AoLfXuC/h0zqRxAIAYIfJ3tgRjIqC
=5CWz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

« Back to merge proposal