Re: [PATCH] revision: simplify argument parsing.
- From
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
- Date
- Apr 3, 2006, 04:22 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vpsjzguff.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <443063E2.1040904@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx> writes:
> The comment is misleading because the patch not only moves stuff around, > it also removes setting of revs->limited when revs->min_age has been > set.
You are correct that the patch does more than it claims to.
That is an independent fix mentioned in my earlier message <7vr74jxhp3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>. We did not have to pay the overhead of having to call limit_list() when only min_age was specified because we did not do traversal filtering using UNINTERESTING logic for min_age, but we called it anyway. Unlike --max-age that marks an old one _and_ its parents uninteresting, it needs to filter a young one without making its parents uninteresting.