From: Shawn O. Pearce Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:40:44 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make reflog query '@{1219188291}' act as '@{2008/08/19 16:24:51}' Message-ID: <20080821154044.GU3483@spearce.org> In-Reply-To: <7vhc9fnxa1.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Shawn O. Pearce" writes: > > > I was just trying to be cute by using the original commit timestamp > > of Git itself. Perhaps 12936648 (1TB / 83)? > > Well, reverse psychology did not quite work, I guess, so I'd ask more > directly. Why not re-send with an update to the same 8-digit rule we use > elsewhere? --8<-- Make reflog query '@{1219188291}' act as '@{2008.8.19.16.24.51}' As we support seconds-since-epoch in $GIT_COMMITTER_TIME we should also support it in a reflog @{...} style notation. We can easily tell this part from @{nth} style notation by looking to see if the value is unreasonably large for an @{nth} style notation. The value 100000000 was chosen as it is already used by date.c to disambiguate yyyymmdd format from a seconds-since-epoch time value. A reflog with 100,000,000 record entries is also simply not valid. Such a reflog would require at least 7.7 GB to store just the old and new SHA-1 values. So our randomly chosen upper limit for @{nth} notation is "big enough". Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce --- sha1_name.c | 5 ++++- 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/sha1_name.c b/sha1_name.c index 4fb77f8..41b6809 100644 --- a/sha1_name.c +++ b/sha1_name.c @@ -349,7 +349,10 @@ static int get_sha1_basic(const char *str, int len, unsigned char *sha1) else nth = -1; } - if (0 <= nth) + if (100000000 <= nth) { + at_time = nth; + nth = -1; + } else if (0 <= nth) at_time = 0; else { char *tmp = xstrndup(str + at + 2, reflog_len); -- 1.6.0.112.g9c75 -- Shawn.