From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 19:28:52 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/19] pathspec: add match_pathspec_depth()
Message-ID: <7vzks9zd3f.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <1292233616-27692-16-git-send-email-pclouds@gmail.com>

Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:

> match_pathspec_depth() is similar to match_pathspec() except that it
> can take depth limit.
>
> In long term, match_pathspec() should be removed in favor of this
> function.

Hmm, this strongly suggests that match_pathspec() should take "const
struct pathspec *" which already contains the necessary information and
more, including the depth limit, no?

> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
> ---
>  dir.c |   45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  dir.h |    3 +++
>  2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dir.c b/dir.c
> index bb5076c..e12dbdd 100644
> --- a/dir.c
> +++ b/dir.c
> @@ -169,6 +169,51 @@ int match_pathspec(const char **pathspec, const char *name, int namelen,
>  	return retval;
>  }
>  
> +int match_pathspec_depth(const char **pathspec, int max_depth,
> +			 const char *name, int namelen,
> +			 int prefix, char *seen)
> +{
> +	int i, retval = 0;
> +
> +	if (!pathspec) {
> +		if (max_depth == -1)
> +			return MATCHED_RECURSIVELY;
> +
> +		if (within_depth(name, namelen, 0, max_depth))
> +			return MATCHED_EXACTLY;

Why the difference between _RECURSIVELY and _EXACTLY here?  If you have a
five-level deep project and give max-depth of 1000, shouldn't you get the
same result as you run the same command with unlimited depth?