Re: ls-files [Was: Re: Fwd: git status options feature suggestion]

From: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: Oct 9, 2008, 21:41 UTC
Message-ID: <20081009214118.GZ8203@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <m3ej2p4g3r.fsf_-_@lugabout.jhcloos.org>

James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> >>>>> "Johannes" == Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> >> > How about "git ls-files -o"?
> >> 
> >> doh... hadn't even heard of that command.
> 
> Johannes> Which is good!  As ls-files is listed as plumbing.
> Johannes> Users should not need to call ls-files,
> 
> That is a bug, then.  ls-files is one of the more important user-level
> commands in git.
> 
> It is vastly more efficient than find(1) or a --recursive call to
> grep(1).

How about using "git grep" then?  No need for ls-files...

-- 
Shawn.