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

Aaron Bentley (abentley) wrote :

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

My apologies, I misread it. This is fine.

 status approved

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?

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

iEYEARECAAYFAkoVzscACgkQ0F+nu1YWqI322wCdHl5vRzxo3pjiSsUxQxGhLEh1
UXUAnRm7t76WyLzDPqoNrB47LR8jpECv
=gteY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

review: Approve

« Back to merge proposal