Re: [PATCH] bash: offer to show (un)staged changes

> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> wrote:
>> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> writes:
>>>
>>> > +           if test ! -z "$GIT_PS1_EXPENSIVE"; then
>>> > +                   git update-index --refresh >/dev/null 2>&1 || w="*"
>>>
>>> This makes the feature unavailable for people who care about the stat
>>> dirtiness and explicitly set diff.autorefreshindex to false, doesn't it?
>>
>> Yup, and I'm one of those people who sets autorefresindex to false
>> in my ~/.gitconfig, usually before I even have user.{name,email} set.
>>
>> I do like the idea of what Thomas is trying to do here, but its
>> so bloody expensive to compute dirty state on every prompt in
>> some repositories that I'd shoot myself.  E.g. WebKit is huge,
>
> I've been thinking about this and wondered
> whether implementing "status --mini" or
> "status --short" which prints "+?*" in wt-status.c
> could be made fast enough.
>
> Should we try to implement and profile this
> or do we know it will be slow beforehand?